plansrme Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 This is not something I've thought of much until recently; I really thought legacies had gone the way of the dodo bird. Do any colleges still give preference to legacies? Do you think they should? Now for the back story: a dear friend of mine has a daughter who was just denied in early action--not deferred, outright denied--by a college from which this friend (and I, for that matter--that's how we met) has a graduate degree. Said school has a 9% acceptance rate for undergraduates. Friend's daughter is a rich white girl, so she is not filling any sort of diversity niche. Daughter was devastated at being denied. She's now applying RD to a bunch of schools, but her heart's just not in it. Apparently, they all thought she was a shoo-in for this school and its 9% acceptance rate. My friend contacted the president of this school (we both know him; he was a lowly professor of ours when we were students there) to suggest changes to their policy regarding legacies, essentially asking them to give legacy preferences. He responded, and she now has a call set up with the director of admissions to discuss the matter. I've not been terribly sympathetic, I have to say. Without even knowing her daughter's stats, I thought admission was a tremendous long shot. My response has really been along the lines of, "Statistics back me up on this, but my observation has always been that nearly every student ends up loving the college they end up attending." Our other mutual friend has been much more sympathetic, though, really encouraging her to push on the legacy issue. Other mutual friend is a Princeton grad, as is the applicant-in-question's father (nice educational pedigree, right?), and they both purport to know that Princeton has good legacy stats. On the one hand, I think giving preferences to legacies is silly; on the other hand, I can see some value in promoting family loyalty to your institution. Also, if we're giving preferences to first-generation college students in admissions, why not legacies? I don't have a dog in this fight; my kids will not be applying to the school in question, and none of them will need a legacy preference to get into my husband's or my undergraduate schools (both Big State Us). I was just surprised to see my really smart friend (1) so shocked by her kid's rejection--don't these people read College Confidential once in a while? how did she not do a better job of managing her kid's expectations?; and (2) so certain that legacy status should count for something. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I am not a fan. I see the POV of colleges: they need a strong donor base, so a family with legacy, and especially strong donor record, would be given some preference in admissions. I personally would like to see college admission based solely on academic merit. (Laura Corin once had such a great quote form the dean in Oxford in her signature... something about not needing second rate scholars just because they happen to play the flute... you may remember) 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettyandbob Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 It's complicated. And your example illustrates, not something to count on. It helps donor base. To that end the university is going to track which alumni are donating and how much. They track how involved in the school each alumnus is (who is attending homecoming, who is serving on what board, who is involved in class newletters). Generally, grad alumni are thought of as less involved so it's the persons with parents and grandparents who earned undergrad degrees who are more likely to be evaluated for legacy admissions.. The other factor is how distiguished the alumnus has become. BUT It's a balance. The school wants to admit students who will 1. be successful at the school 2. be successful and distinguish themselves after graduation If an application does not suggest either of these things very strongly, the admissions committee needs to decide if this student is worth the gamble. With selective schools, it can be a thing that sets the student apart. From admissions standpoint at selective schools you have a pile of hundreds of applications that suggest each student could fit in and do well. How do you tell apart all the applications with 3.9 GPAs, 2300 SAT scores, talented athletes, talented musicians and have community service that make Mother Teresa look lazy. So, if there are legacy applicants in that indistinguishable pile that can be the thing that pushes them over the top. If, however, the legacy only has a 3.7 GPA and 2100 SAT then they aren't making it into the pile in the first place. The admissions committee has some responsibility to hold up the institutions standards and better them. And if the legacy did make it into the pile of tippy top applicants, do they look of the records of their alumnus--what if the parent or grandparent has never given anything to the school and wasn't an amazing standout--maybe then the legacy aspect is not something for admissions to consider at all. I can see the school's standpoint of looking at legacy. I also think it is not a strong factor. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 It doesn't matter to me one way or the other. If a college wants to be known for legacies, fine, if they want to be known for strict focus on academic or other qualifications, fine. Kids should be aware there are no guarantees that they will get their wish. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Maybe they haven't donated enough. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plansrme Posted January 19, 2016 Author Share Posted January 19, 2016 Maybe they haven't donated enough. I nearly told her this! But I didn't think she would be amused. They are clearly NOT amused by this entire process. I feel badly that her daughter is disappointed, but really--somewhere along the way, someone should have managed her (or their) expectations. I gently asked what the GC at daughter's $45K/year private school had to say about the matter and didn't get much of a response. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Weird idea. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettyandbob Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Did the mom consider that the school just not be the right place. I think that if one doesn't get it probably was not the right place to begin with. My brother was firmly convinced his dd should have gotten into a particular school (one where he is a graduate alumnus). He was truly angry she wasn't admitted. (Side note: At the time the school had a president who was making wonky decisions in general so this may have affected the type of student being admitted. That president was gone in less than 5 years. ) In the end niece went to another school, that she loved. She did extremely well. She got great research opportunities. She went to medical school and is now in her residency. Rejection from the particular school that might have been her "first choice" is a distant and meaningless footnote on her lifepath. My niece was theoretically a legacy at both schools because her first choice was where my brother went to graduate school and the school she ultimately attended was where my brother earned his undergrad degree. My brother had strong ties to both schools professionally--he is known in his field and does a lot of work with researchers at both schools. Ultimately, these two schools are completely different environments (one has a heavy liberal arts emphasis, one is small and the other very large, one is rural, one is a sports powerhouse, ect). The undergraduate admissions should be able to distinguish who would do well is these vastly different environments. Both schools are state schools, which regularly make national rankings--they are just completely different environments. I didn't even encourage my dd to apply to my undergrad. I knew the environment at the school had not changed a lot and she would have hated the atmosphere. It is a very prestigious school, but longterm I don't want to help my dd to attend a school where she'd be happy she got in and then unhappy for the next four years while she was there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) The Harvard rep told my guidance counselor back in the mid-'90's that they reserve 25% of their freshman class for legacies. Not sure if this is still the case today. However, unlike with some other special applicant pools, the legacy admits to Harvard do not have any significant differences in qualifications than non-legacy admits. The average SAT score for legacy admits is a mere 2 points below that of non-legacy admits. The chances are better for legacies than non-legacies, but there are so many more qualified legacies than slots that most still won't get in. I couldn't find any more recent data, but in 2011 Harvard rejected 70% of legacy applicants: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/5/11/admissions-fitzsimmons-legacy-legacies/ FWIW, even though I was a legacy acceptance to Harvard, I also got accepted to Stanford & Duke and I wasn't a legacy at those schools. Did it help my chances that my dad attended Harvard? I'm sure. Was I unqualified? I don't think so based on my other acceptances. ETA: I turned down Harvard to attend Stanford so my slot wound up going to someone on the waitlist regardless. Legacy preferences actually benefit the non-legacies because the donations made by alumni help fund scholarships. Harvard, Stanford, etc. can afford to be very generous with their financial aid because they are so successful at fundraising. That would be significantly more difficult without having legacy preferences in admissions. Edited January 19, 2016 by Crimson Wife 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingersmom Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I put legacies in the same category as kids who get admitted because they play a certain sport. I have a relative at an Ivy League school that was recruited for her sport because she is ranked and nearly 6 feet tall (a bonus in her sport). She would not have been admitted based on her academics (even coming from uber fancy private school). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I put legacies in the same category as kids who get admitted because they play a certain sport. Totally different. Athletes have much lower academic qualifications even at top schools. The median football player at Stanford has an SAT score of 1800 out of 2400. http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/ That is not the kind of boost that legacies receive. Though the existence of athletic and racial/ethnic preferences are an argument in favor of keeping legacy preferences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wapiti Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 (edited) My rough understanding is that at highly selective schools, legacy can push a student over the edge into the admissions pile if that student already has the academic package, a small - perhaps tiny - bump in odds in the "lottery" though not a sure thing by any means. However, if the student doesn't have the academic stats, legacy isn't likely to help at all. Naturally there may be differences among schools in the extent of this bump and I'd have questions as to what percentile within the common data set (did I say that right?) one would need to be competitive in the first place. I've poked around a bit at CC to get an idea of the legacy bump for the specific schools dh and I attended. At my undergrad, my understanding is that legacy status means little, but the admissions office doesn't admit that outright. For that school, admissions does not have access to donor info, so donations are not relevant unless they were extremely large. Both dh and I attended a grad school for which undergrad has very competitive admissions and my understanding is the same, that legacy status would mean little to nothing. They are both great schools that have high quality programs in many majors, so I'd certainly suggest them to my kids if their stats are competitive, though with eyes wide open as to the odds. Already though dd has said wants to forge her own path someplace (anyplace?) else LOL and she's only in 9th. Overall, I think legacy status is less helpful than any other type of hook. Perhaps legacy matters more at a slightly lower level of selectivity? Eta, OP, I'd guess your friends didn't have a good idea of the true odds. Edited January 19, 2016 by wapiti 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pehp Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I worked in a selective small private university with a massive base of rich alumni. Legacies were definitely flagged. But if an applicant had an abysmal record and terrible SATs, the legacy wasn't going to make them a shoo-in. However, if they were on the edge of being admitted, it might help. MAYBE. The only time I think a legacy would actually make a huge difference, at least at the university where I worked, would be in the case of a massive, million-dollar donor. Their child would probably be given special preference. But these donors are few and far between, even at rich schools like the one where I worked, and most of those kids seemed to have strong grades and strong SAT scores anyhow, so they're not at the bottom of the heap anyhow, if that makes sense. I think your friend was being unrealistic. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodGrief Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 It doesn't bother me anymore than some of the other non-academic things that push an application up over the top. I was talking to a Stanford alum a couple of days ago. Both he and his wife graduated from there. He said they were told at an event recently that unless they are donating a sginificant amount to the school, that they shouldn't count on legacy status to help their kids. Don't know if that was just part of a sales pitch to encourage donations, but it makes sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian (a lady) Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I'll be another vote for the OP's friend having had unrealistic expectations. One wonders sometimes what people are thinking when their expectations seem to fly in the face of evidence that is widely available. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Your friend was unrealistic. I don't have a problem with a private school offering legacy admissions - largely, private schools do whatever they want to do with their admissions. I agree with others that you probably have to be a large donor before it even begins to matter. Even then, there donor parent probably has to campaign for their student to be admitted in the most selective schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hillfarm Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 The Harvard rep told my guidance counselor back in the mid-'90's that they reserve 25% of their freshman class for legacies. Not sure if this is still the case today. Dd jokes that she may try to play the legacy card there. One of our ancestors was in the class of 1730 at Harvard and his son graduated from there around 1747. Wonder if an Historic Legacy would carry any more weight than a more recent one! :) 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 I have no problem with private schools deciding their classes as they wish. For reasons already stated, legacies are rarely a shoo in, but it definitely makes sense to give qualified students a little bit of a hook for it. None of my three wanted to go where hubby and I went. Rather than starting a family thing they wanted to forge their own paths. They made their decisions. We now support their schools wholeheartedly - as long as they don't play ours in sports! (None do.) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanetC Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I was talking to a Stanford alum a couple of days ago. Both he and his wife graduated from there. He said they were told at an event recently that unless they are donating a sginificant amount to the school, that they shouldn't count on legacy status to help their kids. There was a private prep school that got in trouble for this practice. The school fundraiser with alums by telling them that "we're getting more competitive, if you want your legacy to count for your kid you'd better donate." Well, a donor in OP's friend's position (kid denied) sued to get his donations back for breach of contract! I don't recall hearing how the case settled. I have no doubt that big donors can buy their kids' way into elite schools, though. Regardless of whether they are alums or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plansrme Posted January 20, 2016 Author Share Posted January 20, 2016 Thanks for the responses. I figured the consensus would be that legacies are unfair. It's interesting to see the variety of opinions. I agree wholeheartedly that my friend's expectations were out of line. The daughter's stats were in the middle of those accepted, as best as I've been able to tell, so they weren't expecting her to get in with a 1600 SAT. But, still--9%??? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that the parents relied so heavily on their very expensive school's GC. Even though my high schoolers aren't homeschooled any more, I would never leave these things to a mere paid professional! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daijobu Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) You can also think about it demographically. Every year, new legacies are minted. Many of them have babies. Many of them want some of their children to attend their alma mater. Is there room for all of these legacy admits? I nearly told her this! But I didn't think she would be amused. They are clearly NOT amused by this entire process. I feel badly that her daughter is disappointed, but really--somewhere along the way, someone should have managed her (or their) expectations. I gently asked what the GC at daughter's $45K/year private school had to say about the matter and didn't get much of a response. That expensive private school could have hurt as much as helped her. If many other students at her same school were also applying to the same college, and they were all high achieving, overly qualified applicants, the college is still unlikely to admit them all, if only because they need some diversity in their freshman class. I was checking schools that are in the 9% admit range. They include: Brown, U Penn, Cal Tech, and U Chicago. These are all really tough schools, and there are no guarantees for the majority of applicants. We should keep our emotions in check when we evaluate colleges. Colleges provide a service for which we pay dearly, and it behooves us to consider the cost/benefit rationally. Too bad for your friend's daughter. I hope she finds another college that will propel her into a rewarding adulthood. ETA: I forgot to ask if your friend's name is on any of the buildings on campus? That is a legacy priority. Edited January 20, 2016 by daijobu 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) I have no problem with giving preference to legacies in admissions, all other qualifications being equivalent. I don't find that any different than any other hook. "Hooks" are either all unfair and admissions should just need stats and nothing else or you will look at all an applicants details and hooks will simply occur. Typically I have seen the legacy scenario play out where they have 2 students that they view as equivalent-in such a case the admission preference may go to the legacy. I haven't seen or heard of many occasions where a legacy with substandard credentials is admitted over other candidates. While there may be the occasional case of a legacy getting a pass on typical qualifications I think there are far more factors in play than just being an alum's kid--ie kid of a major donor, kid of a very famous alum, etc. In your friends case I agree with the previous poster that, at a school with a 9% acceptance rate, an applicant that is average-even a legacy applicant-may not be admitted and to expect or count on admission is unrealistic. In the case of early decision/action-being average could work against you as they know they will have plenty of RD applicants that are similar to you or better, they might have less reason to defer an average applicant who will easily be replaced by a RD applicant. Edited January 20, 2016 by JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 There was a private prep school that got in trouble for this practice. The school fundraiser with alums by telling them that "we're getting more competitive, if you want your legacy to count for your kid you'd better donate." Well, a donor in OP's friend's position (kid denied) sued to get his donations back for breach of contract! I don't recall hearing how the case settled. I have no doubt that big donors can buy their kids' way into elite schools, though. Regardless of whether they are alums or not. I agree. I do not think it is common by any stretch. There was a legacy admit of the kind that gives one psuse to consider the ethics. He had a 2.0 out of high school without any other accomplishments and scored a 19 on the ACT if memory serves. My school was quite selective so these stats were bizarrely low. His greatest accomplishment was playing Atari and being popular at the arcade. He was out right rejected - I know all of this because he was quite forthright about it with his classmates and professors - until his daddy made a million dollar donation. Magically, he was admitted. He spent all four years there sleeping, carousing, and failing every class. As my class entered our senior year, the campus wide assumption was that he would not be graduating since he openly admitted he only passed five classes. Nope, his daddy wrote another crazy large check - his donation to the cause getting him a mention from the podium that day along with the program for which it was earmarked - and a BA in business was conferred on the lazy student that day. I was so disgusted that I have never given a dime to my alma mater. I am not the only member of that graduating class to feel that way. But we have supported dh's college, and I have been very happy to support U of MI on behalf of our oldest two and despite technically being a Spartan due to 4H will continje to do so. :) That said, I think this type of thing happening amongst legacy has simply got to be hncommon because otherwise the reputations of the schools that practiced it would tank. We all know it happens in sports, ie. Loosey, goosey on admissions' requirements in order to get star players who were not high achieving students, but if it happened in multiple departments the school would not likely do well in the court of public opinion which makesit hard to attract good students. I think the OP's friend was really rooting hopes in a dream and not reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefgazer Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) I doesn't bother me one way or another if colleges use legacies as a criteria for admittance; I put this in the same category as race, income, sports ability, musical ability, whatever. None of them have much to do with academic talent, but they add diversity to the student body and give each college its distinct "flavor". It would be a dull college world if academics were the only criteria. Edited January 20, 2016 by reefgazer 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Dd jokes that she may try to play the legacy card there. One of our ancestors was in the class of 1730 at Harvard and his son graduated from there around 1747. Wonder if an Historic Legacy would carry any more weight than a more recent one! :) My guidance counselor actually asked the question about whether I was considered a triple legacy since my maternal grandparents attended grad school at Harvard & Radcliffe as well as my dad attending Harvard College for undergrad. The rep said only mother or father (not stepparents) and only undergrad counted for legacy status. So my kids would not be eligible for legacy preference undergrad despite DH attending for grad school and all the previous generations in my family. Their school, their rules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBM Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Legacies donate. That is why so many universities consider them. You can also think about it demographically. Every year, new legacies are minted. Many of them have babies. Many of them want some of their children to attend their alma mater. Is there room for all of these legacy admits? That expensive private school could have hurt as much as helped her. If many other students at her same school were also applying to the same college, and they were all high achieving, overly qualified applicants, the college is still unlikely to admit them all, if only because they need some diversity in their freshman class. I was checking schools that are in the 9% admit range. They include: Brown, U Penn, Cal Tech, and U Chicago. These are all really tough schools, and there are no guarantees for the majority of applicants. We should keep our emotions in check when we evaluate colleges. Colleges provide a service for which we pay dearly, and it behooves us to consider the cost/benefit rationally. Too bad for your friend's daughter. I hope she finds another college that will propel her into a rewarding adulthood. ETA: I forgot to ask if your friend's name is on any of the buildings on campus? That is a legacy priority. Very true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoggirl Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) My guidance counselor actually asked the question about whether I was considered a triple legacy since my maternal grandparents attended grad school at Harvard & Radcliffe as well as my dad attending Harvard College for undergrad. The rep said only mother or father (not stepparents) and only undergrad counted for legacy status. So my kids would not be eligible for legacy preference undergrad despite DH attending for grad school and all the previous generations in my family. Their school, their rules. I have also heard only parents and only undergrad counted. Not just at Harvard. When we attended the award ceremony at Duke University for DukeTIP, someone asked about legacy status at a college admissions information session (yes, this was for a group of students - and their parents - who had just completed the 7th grade). The response was that there might be a slight boost, but legacy status "wouldn't resurrect the dead." Meaning the student had to be in academic range to begin with. So, if you had two students who were the same on paper, but one was a legacy, that might offer an advantage. Not all alumni donate money. Not all alumni donations are created equal. Those who send $1,000 a year are not in the same league as development candidates who might give in the hundred thousands or millions of dollars. An alumni who is ALSO considered a development candidate is the one whose child has the far greater chance of a boost. As far as focusing solely on merit - that is going to result in a HUGE lack of diversity - at least here in the US. Edited January 21, 2016 by Hoggirl 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I personally would like to see college admission based solely on academic merit. (Laura Corin once had such a great quote form the dean in Oxford in her signature... something about not needing second rate scholars just because they happen to play the flute... you may remember) Yes - it was the Head of Admissions, not wanting "Second-rate historians who happen to play the flute." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/7965715/Universities-uninterested-in-pupils-extra-curricular-activities.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian (a lady) Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yes - it was the Head of Admissions, not wanting "Second-rate historians who happen to play the flute." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/7965715/Universities-uninterested-in-pupils-extra-curricular-activities.html In the US, we seem to be going for second-rate historians who can write expressive essays about the non-profit they founded that duplicated the work of other established non-profits, but demonstrated how caring they are. Every time I read about a student or group of students that need to have a safe room with bubbles and calming music because a speaker they don't agree with has dared to come on campus or a student who has written a sorrowful editorial piece about how traumatized she was by being expected to read and discuss Ovid in class, I have a moment when I wonder if the admissions office in that school feels even a glimmer of remorse at having made that particular selection or if they are cheering those particular types of students on and hoping more similar applications come over the transom. [it must be time for lunch, my cynicism is showing.] 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Legacies have not gone the way of the dodo bird, and probably do help with getting donor money which in turn probably helps the uni to be able to do other things it does with its endowment. But if a uni normally admits 9% of all students who apply, and 30% (say, might be typical of an ivy) of legacy students who apply, that is still going to be 70% of legacy students being denied admission. And most legacy applicants are probably not applying with substandard scores and grades, but are otherwise already competitive. I would actually expect that in many cases the legacy applicants are perfectly likely to have good scores, grades, ECs etc, because the parents will know what is needed for that school, and because kids of parents who went to elite schools probably have pretty good high schools to go to on average. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoggirl Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I also think the legacy carries significantly more weight in the EA/ED round. That is the time to play that card, if one has it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) Other mutual friend is a Princeton grad, as is the applicant-in-question's father (nice educational pedigree, right?), and they both purport to know that Princeton has good legacy stats. I believe Princeton which is my alma mater has an aprox 30% admit rate for legacies. My understanding was that this meant that 30% of legacies applying are admitted, not that 30% of class is reserved for legacies. I don't think my son will apply there, but even if he did, and had a good portfolio and competitive scores, I would consider it a long shot for him to be admitted there. The children of friends where both the mom and dad went were not admitted. eta I don't think there would be any more point to raising a fuss about not being admitted as a legacy than not being admitted with perfect SAT scores. The top elite schools get more than plenty of applicants in all such categories. Maybe this will turn out to be a good learning and growing experience for the daughter who was not admitted as a legacy. I suggest she not consider Princeton a shoo-in due to her Dad having gone there though either. Edited January 21, 2016 by Pen 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daijobu Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Colleges also don't want to jeopardize the statistics of their classes (average SAT score, average GPA, etc.) by admitting legacies with below-average stats. And I would think schools don't want to have the reputation of being a legacy-favoring school versus one which is more meritocratic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I know some folks with behind-the-scenes knowledge at one very elite university, and they assure me that real driving force for that school is always money. And yes, legacy kids get preference. Legacy, however, does not make them a shoo-in; how could it? They could doubtless fill their entire class with legacy kids alone. This is a school who can take their pick from the top-of-the-top students, so choosing to select a few legacies instead of other comparable students doesn't hurt them a bit and helps ensure school loyalty among certain families with funds to contribute; they don't want a class full of legacies though, they're going to choose a lot of non-legacy students as well. I dunno, it's not a game I plan to play. The schools can run their businesses however they want, there are plenty of places my kids can get a good education and I'm not going to stress over whether some legacy kid gets preference at one of the big names. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kewb Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I think your friend did a lousy job managing her child's expectations. I have no issue with legacies if that is a schools policy. It is a business and they need money. Unless your family is donating a particle accelerator being a legacy does not guarantee acceptance. It simply increases your odds. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 Wondering what the follow up is? Did your friend "push on the legacy issue"? I am thinking that even if she did, she may have been told that having been there as a grad student doesn't even make her daughter a "legacy" so the dd would be in the regular 9% statistic group, not some higher level. Has the dd recovered and gotten on with things? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.