“To that end, if I was running the college, I would make any request by this guy a top priority. Tell him no on something and potentially piss him off? No thanks! And that’s generally how business works, and these schools are a business. Why jeopardize the gravy train and the reciprocal good will?”
Taking this argument at face value, even someone in the 1st percentile could get an offer if that was all it took. Somewhere on the continuum of grades vs how much you piss the donor off (and how close the relative needs to be to really piss the donor off) vs rather granting admission to one of the very many well qualified applicants with no donor connection is where the decision gets made. You’ve chosen 25th percentile because that’s where your son is, but it could be far off from that.
By the way, I hope your son doesn’t know any of this, because if he does get admitted he’s going to spend his college career knowing it was a favor rather than on his own merit; imposter syndrome is enough of an issue at these colleges even without a “real’ reason to be feeling it.
My dad was a significant donor to a school in our state, or at least known amongst the list of donors. He wrote a couple letters about admissions over his time. Some got in, some didn’t. He seemed to have more success when advocating for an applicant for a specific scholarship (need and merit based) when he was the recommendation letter writer. Of course, in these cases, the student was well within the stats for both the school and the scholarships.
OP, I think you are looking at it a little wrong when you say a non admit would be like the college saying “no” to the donor. Of course your kids’ app is going to get looked at and evaluated, with or without this phone call. If he doesn’t get admitted, it’s not saying no to the donor. It’s saying, at best, taking into consideration this highly important personal recommendation from a valued donor, we feel that this student is not a fit for this incoming class.
Plus is your son only applying because its Top 25 and you have a connection to a donor? IMO there are much better criteria to choose a school.
He’s a savvy guy - I’m sure he recognizes the level of gratitude he would garner from me - and let’s just say I do have the ability to reciprocate on a commensurate level. No need to explain further, just assume he could reasonably expect to benefit also
@jimmybobsutton My response was a bit of an outlier, because I do think a major donor with buildings named after him carries potentially significant weight in any recommendation he makes. At some schools special admits (e.g., trustee recommended, development cases (where your kid would probably fall), dean’s interest list, etc.) enjoy relatively high rates of admission.
Every school has their own processes to handle special cases, and like anything there is much variability. I know we aren’t talking Harvard, but this article regarding some of the findings from the recent lawsuit is interesting and hits upon some of the points discussed in this thread. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harvard-admissions-trial/
Largely agree with “skieurope,” but I do know first hand of cases that were reconsidered and looked at with extra care because of very influential requests.
I have a more important question:
Is it the right place for him? Does he really want it? We had some applicants applying who were just not the right fit for our programs. Do not get lost in the prestige of the institution.
Just because the donor could benefit personally from you by making the call to admission doesn’t mean the school is going to admit your son. The donor is not the one making the decision.
I also agree with the poster who said that a rejection of your son’s application is NOT saying ‘no’ to the donor. I also can’t imagine suddenly stopping support of my alma mater because they didn’t accept a work associate’s child that I recommended. All alumni know how competitive admission is and there is no way I would take it personally. I know plenty of alumni donors whose own kids weren’t accepted and they still contribute.
IMO, you want your kid to be successful in college. If the adcom doesn’t think your kid is a good fit, trust that decision, and move on.
Really what’s the difference with legacy kids? Or minorities for that matter?
Same concept - getting a leg up in the admission process because of WHO your parents are, not WHAT you’ve done. But most of you are ok with that I’m sure - people have interesting levels of comfort with the selectivity concept based on their own situations - pretty comical actually. God forbid someone else is getting one over on the system though!! Moral outrage!!! How will your child live with themselves knowing they don’t deserve to be there!! Puhlease
We will see. I actually think I’m underestimating the potential influence. I think he will be fast tracked to approval similar to the stud linebacker. acceptance provide a potential economic benefit in both situations
Assessing the student’s potential fit is first important step, as I said in my post above, #8.
However, I do think posters are being somewhat naive as to how development admits work. OP stated this potential recommender has buildings (plural) named after him. @skieurope with all due respect, this donor has no reason to call the director of admissions. At many schools, an 8-figure (maybe 9, depending on the buildings) donor has a direct line to the President, Trustees, Development Office, and other high ranking admin officials. People in all those roles recommend applicants to admissions, every year. Those recommended applicants have higher than average rates of admission, and we got to see an interesting glimpse of it with the revelation of the existence of the Dean’s Interest List at Harvard, via the lawsuit data.
Your client seems like a generous person. I imagine he has made calls and is making calls on behalf of many other people’s children as well in order to curry favor with preferred business associates. You might consider asking him his success rate in getting all of these children admitted. He would know the answer to your original question far better than anonymous strangers on this website.
Yes, they do. In the discussion about the Harvard lawsuit, I advanced the idea that since many of the “donations” people make are clearly made in exchange for a personal benefit (often admission for their descendants), those donations should not qualify as tax free on either the part of the donor or the college. The tax code clearly states that payments that provide benefit to the donor are not qualified tax deductible donations. It’s the same reason when you donate $100 to your local humane society and they send you a tote bag as a thank you the amount of your donation is listed as something like $90 on the receipt, because the value you received was $10 for the bag. A college admissions spot to a top college is at least as valuable as a tote bag. If college donors are receiving the benefit of admissions for their family and friends - that’s a benefit that should be valued and not deductible.
That’s the $$$ position.
From a personal standpoint, this sort of admission is not something I’d be interested in for my children because it doesn’t align with our family values or the skills I want them to learn. I don’t respect it when colleges play that game and I wouldn’t engage in it. This sort of good 'ol boys network is part of why it is so difficult for women and minorities to break into success. I have sons and they’re not minorities, so of course I want them to do well, but not at the cost of stepping on others. Let them compete on a level field. I think they’ll be fine with that level competition, but if they’re not, then that’s a fair outcome.
Not in favor, especially for legacy. Minority preference - might make sense if the college itself has an issue with past discrimination or otherwise has a strong case to show the program is necessary and not achievable by any other means.
You probably don’t want to know what I think about the preferences given to the football “studs” you referenced.
Haha - no. Good ‘ol boy network comment annoyed me though. As I said before, tough for people to have selective moral outrage when it comes to admission hooks