<p>Debate-addict is definitely right. All of the legacies I've seen get into Harvard in the last 10 years have been students who definitely were as strong as the nonlegacies who got in. This includes URMs.</p>
<p>The legacies whom I have seen who were good, but not quite as strong as the students who got in, tended to be either rejected outright or waitlisted and then rejected.</p>
<p>I would tend to agree with Northstarmom, but my definition of strong may be more inclusive. I know of a number of recruited athletes who are legacies and their hs records, while very, very good, were not as stellar as some rejected applicants. </p>
<p>Also, I'm not sure how Albert Gore III stacked up...!!! (But I was not bothered by his admission.)</p>
<p>At this point I think we should refresh..there are other factors that are very similar to legacies..such as recruited athletes as a matter of fact. Let us not forget minorities..they have the same advantage, even a bit stronger as legacies do. And there are also extracurriculars and essays, as well as personal recommendations. Grades and scores are definitely not the only ones, so those athletes you mentioned meredithv may have had some additional qualifications..but then again, you can never really know what the qualifications of the other person is, so it is always hard to evaluate.</p>
<p>This is also an issue I have come up with in CC's chances threads. We evaluate other people and make predictions but we are missing one fundamental element. Recommendations, essays and (some times) interviews, and these three components are redoubtably of prime significance to an application.</p>
<p>Since my daughter was one of those legacy/recruited athletes, I'm not complaining. She was also a Nat'l Merit Semifinalist, but more top 15% of her class - not top 5% or whatever.</p>
<p>I would also put character as a very important element to an application. And I wouldn't be surprized if in the post-Blair Hornstein era, Harvard does too.</p>
<p>As Northstarmom said and all of us agreed, people would not get in simply because of a legacy-recruited athlete issue. Your daughter is bound to have some other qualities as well..otherwise Harvard would not have any inhibitions and would reject her</p>
<p>Does "cute as a button" count?</p>
<p>Actually, the Hornstine thing shows that Harvard values common sense over idiotic pettiness. I'd like to think that most schools feel the same way.</p>
<p>Harvard did well to rescind Hornstine's admission. Morals, value and veracity should and thankfully are appreciated by great colleges.</p>