Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/207458 
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 12633
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
The lawsuit Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard University provided an unprecedented look at how an elite school makes admissions decisions. Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, legacies, those on the dean's interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.
Subjects: 
higher education
college admissions
legacy
admissions preference
JEL: 
I23
I24
J15
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
468.74 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.