<p>The fact that highly selective colleges try to obtain this kind of diverse mix is one of the significant things that makes them great and partly what attracted my own kids to such schools. If they wanted a more homogenous student body, they could have gone to one of our state colleges here in Vermont! These elite colleges are purposely trying to build a very diverse mix of students (with one thing at least in common…smarts). The fact that these kinds of colleges value that sort of mixed student body is precisely part of why attending such a school is appealing to some people. This makes the education there even better. Part of college is the education you receive outside the classroom itself. There should be nothing surprising that such colleges try to achieve a balance of all these different hooks and types of students as it is part of their mission. If you (generic you) don’t like that concept, no need to apply! So much outcry over these schools and their admissions’ policies and processes and yet so many people want to go to these elite colleges anyway! Amazing. :D</p>
<p>Hmm, maybe I should have applied to Princeton.</p>
<p>I have no problem with a higher percentage of Asians in the student body than exist in the general population. It makes sense to me. Many Asians highly value education and are very bright and so logistically there are more of them in the applicant pool. At some elite colleges, I believe there are more Jewish kids in the student body percentage-wise than in the general population. Again, these kids come from a culture that values education highly and have many educated parents as well.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that the numbers texaspg is whining about show a year-to-year increase in minority representation: 39.8% for the entering class of 2013, 43.2% for 2014, and 43.8% this year. The 4% increase in two years represents about 66 really happy kids.</p>
<p>Also, correct me if I am wrong but I think those numbers only apply to domestic students, and don’t count international admittees. They, by the way, are the truly disadvantaged – they are about 7% of the admittees, and maybe as much as 30% of the applicants.</p>
<p>I wonder if the same people who whine about legacy admits also whine about how in the job world, many people (maybe even themselves?) have obtained jobs through networking. Is that unfair? Not everyone has a good network or contacts. Should only those who apply for a job cold with no network contacts be hired?</p>
<p>I think most HYPS schools are quite close in their admission mix since they do compete with each other. </p>
<p>Yale 2014 (includes U.S. citizens and Permanent
Residents only)</p>
<p>African American: 8.4%
Asian American: 17.4%
Caucasian: 43%
Hispanic: 8.6%
Native American: 1.5%
No Response: 9.8%</p>
<p>Princeton 2014 class <a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/admission/pdfs/Profile_10.pdf[/url]”>http://www.princeton.edu/admission/pdfs/Profile_10.pdf</a></p>
<p>African American 7.3
American Indian 1.0
Asian American 18.1
Hispanic 7.9
Multiracial 3.8
International 10.9</p>
<p>Stanford 2014 [The</a> Undergraduate Program: Stanford University Facts](<a href=“http://www.stanford.edu/about/facts/undergraduate.html]The”>http://www.stanford.edu/about/facts/undergraduate.html)</p>
<p>African American 11.1%
Asian American 19.8%
International 8.4%
Mexican American 9.7%
Native American 2.3%
Native Hawaiian 1.6%
Other Hispanic 7.5%
White 32.0%
Declined to State / Other 7.6% </p>
<p>Penn
[Penn</a> Admissions: Incoming Class Profile](<a href=“http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/profile/]Penn”>http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/profile/)</p>
<p>Multicultural Background Number Enrolled Percent of Class
Black 218 9.0%
Hispanic 209 8.7%
Asian 592 24.5%
American Indian 25 1.0%
Total 1,044 43.2%</p>
<p>I would rather be labelled belligerent than whiny. The article from last year mentioned changes in the policies in labeling to not be able to do a true comparison. So I wont be too sure that the numbers went up 3+% from two years ago.</p>
<p>The announcement from Harvard last week mentioned 12% foreign nationals who accepted. It probably includes permanent residents?</p>
<p><a href=“http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/05/high-yield-for-class-of-’15-2/[/url]”>http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/05/high-yield-for-class-of-’15-2/</a></p>
<p>Here are the accepted numbers. </p>
<p>African-American students make up 9.8 percent of the class, Asian Americans 18.9 percent, Latinos 10.3 percent, and Native Americans 1.6 percent.</p>
<p>The Class of 2015 will be the most international in Harvard’s history. The yield on international students was an unprecedented 90.4 percent, and 11.9 percent of the class are citizens of other countries.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Missing Monty Python? </p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Monty Python - Argument Clinic](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM&feature=related]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM&feature=related) versus [YouTube</a> - Complaints Department](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqn-B5tE2kE&NR=1]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqn-B5tE2kE&NR=1)</p>
<p>Xiggi - why is there so much blood, sex and nudity on television today? </p>
<p>I liked those robot war videos you posted.</p>
<p>Quote:
Every seat denied to hard working brilliant students in order to admit the child of legacy, is another nail in the un-American housing these universities have built. (MY POST, #411)</p>
<p>fROM POST #413: </p>
<p>“This statement is offensive to the hard working brilliant students who are admitted to highly selective colleges who happen to also be legacies.”</p>
<p>It is legacy admissions that are offensive, period. No one should be looked at funny IF their parents went to the same school. If they stand-out, may they be admitted for this reason and this reason alone.</p>
<p>DS refused to apply to the ivy for which he is legacy (because of me) because I raised him right. He said this was “just wrong.” His other parent went to a superb public university, which (thank goodness) does not engage in this.
He got it there, and into many other universities. It’s all been good for us.</p>
<p>Public money in the U.S.A. should not support any school that practice legacy. Let the “children of” get in ON THEIR OWN.</p>
<p>205mom - There is a difference between not applying and not applying as a legacy. If your son was trying to prove a point, could nt he have applied without stating legacy?</p>
<p>205mom:</p>
<p>Many students who are admitted who are legacies would have gotten in even if they were not a legacy. I mentioned way earlier in this thread that my D was admitted to a school where she was a double legacy and I feel quite certain she would have been admitted anyway (it was a Match school for her, not a Reach) as she got into much more selective colleges than that one (didn’t end up attending the college where she was a legacy). </p>
<p>I don’t see it as raising your kid right by not letting him apply to where he was a legacy (or his thinking there was something wrong with it). If he wasn’t qualified that is one thing. But if he was qualified anyway, I don’t know what you proved. He would have gotten in on his own merits if accepted. And ya know, many very qualified legacy applicants to Ivies are actually rejected! </p>
<p>As texaspg suggests, your son did not have to fill in on the application where his parents attended and therefore the fact that he was a legacy would not have been known.</p>
<p>Well, 205mom, I sincerely hope you never voted for George W. Bush. Or Mitt Romney, John McCain, George H.W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Jerry Brown, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Simon . . . . Lotta folks out there got the exact equivalent of a legacy preference, in college and in much more important things, and somehow I’ve missed how un-American this is and how we should all be filled with revulsion at it.</p>
<p>Do you mean that where it’s asked, you just don’t tell?..</p>
<p>I want to make myself clear; admissions have a hard job. Selective schools get their pick and turn down many great applicants. The PC police want the right mix, the finance dept. wants their “development” and the art and sports folks have their requests. </p>
<p>But there is no philosophical/moral defense of legacy admits if you examine it. Can we be honest for once? I try to be. It’s not an ax; it’s called a principled position.</p>
<p>Have we forgotten that these are EDUCATIONAL institutions?</p>
<p>I NEVER told DS not to apply. I think he just got the sense that legacy is wrong.
And finaly- if your kid got in and you believe legacy had nothing to do with it, why would you not support discouraging this admissions practice?</p>
<p>Honestly, folks- I am happy for all our motivated kids. Legacy is wrong, though.</p>
<p>205mom…what do you feel about other “tip” factors? Some kids have access to SAT tutors and some don’t. That ain’t fair! Some have access to good college counseling and some don’t. That ain’t fair! Some are able to participate in certain extracurricular endeavors that cost money or summer programs that cost money and others cannot. That ain’t fair! Some students have parents who are very involved in their education and some don’t. That ain’t fair! </p>
<p>I honestly don’t know much about you (other than you or your husband went to an Ivy League college), but I am inferring that your son had some advantages that would help him be admitted one day to an Ivy League school that some kid in my town up the road at the trailer park did not have. So, is that fair? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I have to admit, this thread is fairly entertaining. In a Kafka-esque way. New characters keep appearing with ever more outrageous and un-believable “positions”. I can’t wait for the third act. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Who needs a MORAL defense of legacy admits??? </p>
<p>The school admits SOME legacies (not all who apply by any means) because when all else is equal in terms of admissions qualifications, these admits fulfill another purpose at the school. It is to the college’s benefit to enhance alumni relations, donations, dedication to the college, networks, etc. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, these are educational institutions. The admitted legacy students have the academic “goods” (the profile of the admitted class is very strong at these schools and includes legacy students), and other needs are met that enhance the institution itself by having some legacy students.</p>
<p>curm, yes, some statements I have read here do border on outrageousness. One person wrote that the legacy students were admitted over hard working brilliant kids. Tell that to some hard working brilliant kids who happen to be legacies, geez. Now, it is wrong to even let your kid apply to the college that mom or dad attended as he would not get in on his own merits! Hope nobody here ever has let their kid work for their company either!</p>
<p>Oh, and what about those dumb athletes?? If I were an admissions officer, if I had two kids and one was a top student but was just in a little club or two and not much else outside of academics and another top student who also excelled in a varsity sport…I’d pick the latter kid because that kid was able to excel at academics and at something else at the same time and manage it all. That kid would be contributing to the college classroom and to the campus life as well.</p>
<p>This is not about the unfairness of life. Some advantages are given at birth, others earned, some more and some less.
But this is one ‘advantage’ (despite the Brown alum who claims it isn’t in their interviewing experience) that comes from the institutions themselves. They are free to do it, but public money should not go to them</p>
<p>Hot topic! I think I’ll leave it here. Too many are committed to their Alma Mater and wanting to pass it on.</p>
<p>I could care less about passing my alma mater on. We could not give a care if either of our girls ever applied to our alma mater!! I found it really interesting that when D1 was researching schools, I saw my alma mater on her list because she explored it and saw how it fit what she wanted. It became one of her favorite schools (preferred it over some Ivies she got into!). She didn’t opt to attend in the end, and never bothered me one iota. </p>
<p>My kid went to an Ivy where she was not hooked as a legacy, URM, athlete, or development admit. Doesn’t bother me that there are others who fit those categories at her college. Not a bit.</p>