<p>I've been trying to figure out why that article bothered me so much. I think I finally have it. It wasn't just that the parents thought of their son as having failed even though he was admitted to Carnegie Mellon and Johns Hopkins. It was that they talked this way in public to a reporter for a nationally distributed newspaper. The sense of entitlement (our son had the stats and was at GROTON) got to me as well. It seemed they didn't choose Groton for the education itself, but as a means to an end and then were upset that the means didn't work.</p>
<p>Unexamined in the obvious slant of the article is where their preferred alternative admissions policies would leave those who couldn't come up with the money for a place like Groton or had parents who don't want them in boarding school.</p>
<p>Maybe that sense of entitlement came through in the applications and this is why he didn't make it. My husband went to an exclusive prep school, too, but somehow managed to escape unscathed. He DID start out as a political conservative and ended up getting more and more liberal as he stayed there. This was contrary to the politics of most there; it was just that some of the kids had such a feeling that they should have it made and the world had better recognize it (if not, mummy and daddy would make it).</p>
<p>In the article, mummy and daddy didn't have the wherewithall to try to bribe the colleges. But then they took their outrage public.</p>
<p>It seemed a very unfair article, because you only get one side. The colleges can't very well explain why they didn't take this or that applicant. But the applicants can carry on about how it was special unfair factors all they want.</p>
<p>I do wonder how much a true hook something like "legacy tied to family giving" actually is. I can come up with an anecdote, too. My niece applied to a selective place. She had high grades at a strong private school, high test scores, good ECs, and demonstrated artistic talent. She would have been fifth generation at the school. There are two buildings on campus named for ancestors; the family, taken together, has been by far the largest private donor in the history of the school. She didn't get in -- wasn't even waitlisted. The family thought this was a terrible injustice because of all it has done for the university over the years; "we give and give for decades, and this is the reward we get; she is a highly qualified candidate after all."</p>
<p>To make sure the record is clear, this isn't the school my daughter is attending. She is at a place at which she didn't have legacy status (not much development potential either, since the bulk of the family money has actually gone to the other school!). She was admitted to the school in question, though. I suppose if she had gone there and people didn't know about her cousin, they would have assumed it was her family that was the deciding factor and how unfair it was because they happened to have a higher ACT score than she did.</p>