Working Paper: NBER ID: w26316
Authors: Peter Arcidiacono; Josh Kinsler; Tyler Ransom
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.
Keywords: No keywords provided
JEL Codes: I23; I24; J15
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| ALDC applicants (J79) | higher admission rates (I23) |
| recruited athletes (Z22) | higher admission rates (I23) |
| legacy status (D15) | increase in admissions likelihood (I23) |
| Dean's Interest List (M59) | increase in admissions likelihood (I23) |
| removing ALDC preferences (Y70) | reduce share of white admits (I24) |
| removing ALDC preferences (Y70) | increase admits from other racial groups (J15) |
| ALDC status (Y80) | admission outcomes (I24) |