Legacies - NOT an automatic admission!

Parents Forum
41

<p>
[quote]
Why are people so irritated when the "legacy advantage" is brought up? You wouldn't have mentioned it on the college application unless you felt that your kid needed the "extra help" in getting into the school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What's the kid supposed to do? Lie?</p>

<p>The question is asked on the application. The student answers it just as he/she answers any other question. </p>

<p>My daughter is currently a freshman at a university where she is a legacy. Her stats were above the 75th percentile for that school. She would certainly have been a viable candidate even without the legacy status (although of course there are no guarantees for anyone). But lying on the application in order to conceal her legacy status would have been absurd. And choosing not to apply to this particular school because she is a legacy, despite the fact that it had everything she wanted in a college, seems equally absurd to me.</p>

42

<p>You're missing the point. For the student with SAT/ACT scores or GPA that fall on the boardline for admission when compared to other applicants, the legacy student will often be given the advantage toward acceptance. Many students are more than qualified to get into great colleges but their test scores may be on the lower end of the scale. I'm one that believes that tests scores don't give a true picture of a person's academic potential but unfortunately, many colleges must draw the line somehow when it comes to admissions. If this is the case, it definitely makes sense to apply to a school where the student is a legacy. This will give your kid a bit of an edge in the admissions process. It's not a big edge but in this competitive market, any edge is a help.</p>

43

<p>Legacy helps no matter how accomplished the student may be. It's not just borderline students who get the tip. Kids in the 75th percentile with other great attributes are being rejected fall the time. Legacy kids have a valuable edge.</p>

44

<p>At the college I went to, the fact that a higher percentage of applicants get in from legacy pool than regular has a lot to do with the legacy applicants being extremely desirable candidates in terms of SATs and grades and leadership because of their advantaged background. Still, most legacy applicants at this particular school do get rejected, and I expect my daughter to be rejected if she applies since her grades and SATs are below average for the applicant pool. I think I'd have to donate a couple of buildings to make a difference in the admission decision.</p>

45

<p>The legacy advantage has nothing to do with money. I honestly don't know the reasoning behind the legacy "boost", but based on people I know whose kids have benefited from legacy status, there is most definitely no big contribution attached. This is a perfect question for an admissions rep to answer for all of us!</p>

46

<p>I know at the college I went to, the admissions office can definitely check on how much $$$ the alum parent has donated and I know of one case where they really didn't want to take a certain legacy (high grades and SATs but his teachers and even his coach didn't like him!), and were really happy to find out his parents had never given any $$. I don't know if they check in every case, but I guess it would be good business practice to; you don't want to accidentally reject a multimillion dollar donor's kid.</p>

47

<p>SS,<br>
amen. and so what? Legacy status counts and helps, just like so many things. It just happens to be a bit more obvious.</p>

<p>The real irony to me is the total emphasis on getting into these elite schools, especially given the evidence that it does not matter all that much. The truth is that a kid with stellar attributes will do well whether or not they get into an ivy or Stanford. In some cases, I bet they'll do better. I even know one who did. :)</p>

48

<p>Gee, I wonder if it is too late to start donating to the school where my H got a masters and S may want to attend in 3 years! Do you think it will look bad if we suddenly start giving them money 18 years after the fact? After reading these boards for several months, I am already thinking of having him apply ED and not apply for financial aid. He may need all the help he can get!</p>

49

<p>My friend went to Princeton and gave a six figure donation right before son applied, but hadn't given regularly before that. Son didn't get in, although he did get into another competitive school.</p>

50

<p>mamabear1234, it was said that a graduate alumni got less point than an undergraduate alumni in the eye of some elite college's adcom. Say under graduate legacy got 2 point, graduate legacy got 1 point. </p>

<p>Personally, I see nothing wrong with legacy edge, if race can be an admission hook, why not legacy? Like some early poster said, if nothing else the legacy can help the yield. But race and/or URM since they are so 'demanded' these days, you can't even guarantee the yield.</p>

51

<p>anotherNJmom, that doesn't surprise me. I think it is hopeless anyway unless he gets his act together and starts doing something more extracurricular!</p>

52

<p>I've seen parents become very upset when their child didn't get into the parent's alma mater, so there is an expectation that there will be a legacy boost (tip/hook?). Just be thankful that your child is happy and blossoming whatever their choice.</p>

53

<p>Here's something I just came across--and fairly recent:</p>

<p>Legacy</a> study raises questions about policy - The Daily Princetonian</p>

<p>At Princeton, legacies have a 39% admit rate vs. 10% overall--and some of the legacies aren't cutting it academically (big surprise). In this case, legacy status is being used as much more than a "tiebreaker".</p>

54

<p>I found it interesting that Oxford and Cambridge place almost a negative value on legacy--I read this on a recent International CC thread. Children of Oxbridge graduates were deliberately NOT mentioning that their parents or grandparents went there.</p>

55

<p>yayverilly, thanks for the link. This dose not suprise me. I suspect this is one of many reasons P remove the ED, where most legacy got accepted.</p>

56

<p>You can't really compare the admit rates of legacies to the overall admit rates without correcting for stats. It could be (this is what the schools suggest) that legacies, on average, have higher stats than the overall pool, since they come from educated families with at least one parent who went to that school. It could be, though, that the legacy pool has LOWER stats than the overall pool, because legacies are encouraged to apply even if their stats are low for that school. Unless you know more about this, you really can't say whether a 39% legacy admit rate for Princeton is high or low. (Also, I'm always skeptical about the admit rate, since I don't know how much of the applicant pool is made up of totally unrealistic applicants.)</p>

57

<p>Have any of you read "The Price of Admission" by Daniel Golden? He discusses all the various advantages some applicants have, including legacies. If I understood him correctly, IN GENERAL, legacy at top colleges only matters if you are able to donate or have donated gobs of money. Prep schools, especially, can tell potential colleges how much money Johnnie's parents have already given to them (hint hint at what you will get if you admit Johnnnie), etc. They honestly don't need to keep other legacies happy, their donation-potential is low.</p>

<p>Mr. Golden also mentions that whatever you do, don't be a legacy that needs financial aid! The college thinks, "YOU didn't do enough with your education. We won't make the same mistake twice!" I can't remember if he has evidence to back up that assertion.</p>

<p>My alma mater openly says the advantage they give legacies is one extra read by the dean of admissions, if their first impression was a denial. The dean has to be convinced that the student honestly cannot do the work. We'll see. If my daughter gets admitted to my alma mater and "everyone" wants to assume it's because of "legacy" and those piddly $25 donations I have given each year, so be it! I'll know better. If the truth were told, she is infinitely more qualified than I ever was! </p>

<p>We're more in the place mentioned by an earlier post: What? She didn't get into XYZ where you went? There must be something REALLY wrong with her! </p>

<p>It's odd, but most people in our small community have learned over the years where everyone went to college. At the time, years ago, it seemed quite innocent. Kind of like, "How did you two meet?" or simply noticing someone wearing a college sweatshirt and that started a conversation. </p>

<p>True confessions: we have a neighbor who has a really nice daughter, but she is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and to us that matters much less than the fact that she is such a sweetheart. However, when we heard she was accepted at Stanford, her father's alma mater, my husband and I looked at each other and both said, "Legacy!" This was NOT in front of the girl's parents, however!</p>

58

<p>
[quote]

If the truth were told, she is infinitely more qualified than I ever was!

[/quote]

Don't take it wrong, I read the similar comment from a dad in above link. But, imo, kids shall be compared to their current peers not their parents. ... In one info session, a senior adcom had said, parents shouldn't compare their kids against generations ago, now SAT score raised about 200 points compare to parents' era.</p>

59

<p>Interesting, jerseymom. It's all relative, I suppose. In our family, though, I can tell you I never did the homework my daughter does, or worked so dang hard at everything! I certainly didn't participate in scads of extracurriculars which seems to be the norm these days. I guess what was good enough back then just isn't good enough now, but everyone was in the same boat then as they are now. </p>

<p>I still think the idea of "legacy" is nuts since in the US we claim to be a meritocracy! But I also think making college entrance decisions based on race or culture or muscle mass/coordination or euphonium-playing or Idaho-dwelling is crazy, too! Colleges are places of higher learning, and if selection should be based on anything, it should be on how well you have been a "higher learner". I certainly wouldn't expect an art school to admit my daughter who can't draw a stick figure simply to make the class "better rounded" or a music conservatory to accept my son who is tone deaf in order to give them an underrepresented "minority". </p>

<p>Regarding AA, in my opinion, it only makes sense to do the "leveling" years before college entrance. It's an artificial "correction" that I don't think helps anyone in the long run. This is only my opinion.</p>

<p>As far as the other things colleges look at, like your gender, what instrument you play or where you lived, seem irrelevant to the work of academics. One Indian student recently asked me, "When it comes to college, why do you Americans care about things that are not necessary?" I had no good answer for him.</p>

60

<p>
[quote]
One Indian student recently asked me, "When it comes to college, why do you Americans care about things that are not necessary?" I had no good answer for him.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No offense, je ne sais, because I agree with most of what you say. But every time I hear this I think, Ugh. Like being a great test-taker is the only thing necessary for success in life (Or even necessary AT ALL)? Please.</p>