<p>Why was the Andover dean so concerned about Bush's prospects at Yale? Perhaps he glanced at Bush's SAT score of 1206, above average but nowhere near the level needed for acceptance at an Ivy League school. (According to Cecil Adams, who writes the Straight Dope column, Bush's score was almost 200 points lower than the average for Yale freshmen circa 1970.) Bush's middling SAT score, incidentally, is roughly the same as that for most of the black students admitted to selective schools in a major Mellon Foundation study that began in 1976. </p>
<p>Perhaps that Andover dean also looked at Bush's "solid" grades, which may or may not have exceeded the C average he later earned at Yale. In other words, despite Bush's status as a Yale "legacy" from a very prominent and wealthy family, the dean was sufficiently naive to think he might not be admitted. </p>
<p>Back then, "affirmative action" for the sons and daughters of alumni was a major factor in admissions at Yale and other selective colleges -- and continues to be an important factor today. The children of alumni are about twice as likely to be accepted by Yale as other applicants. Whether their qualifications are twice as good, nobody seems to know. In the class of 2004, according to this interesting essay in the Yale Herald, the largest identifiable group of matriculates is from "families with some kind of Yale affiliation."</p>
<p>Is there a good reason why he shouldn't have been admitted? He obviously could do the work. Graduated on time. Went to graduate school. Served his country. Went on to become President. What's the deal? I don't quite understand why it should even be an issue?</p>
<p>(I am not sure about Bush's day, though I suspect developmental admit/legacy status/financial status is more important today than it was in 1975. It is interesting, though, to watch legacy admission become more and more of an "issue" at the first time in the history of these institutions that women and minorities can significantly take advantage of it.)</p>
<p>No Bush bashing by Mini? I'm almost disappointed.</p>
<p>Anyway, I would say the Yale admission staff did a pretty good job selecting Bush and Kerry (whose SATs were lower than Bush's). If you had the choice of selecting a guy with really high SATs and high grades who would likely end up in a research lab or you could chose a guy who may become a Senator, Governor, or President but with lower SATs and grades, who would you chose. The right answer is the guy with lower SATs and grades. I would say Yale did a pretty good job by admitting Bush and Kerry.</p>
<p>Bush bashing by moi? Clinton/Albright bashing from me all the time; but it is sinful to inflict cruelty upon the impaired. ;)</p>
<p>I doubt they know who is likely to be a Senator, Governor, or Pres. at time of admission, but they can well predict where their future "health and well-being" are likely to come from.</p>