<p>i have a friend like that too...5 generations of his family has gone to Yale.
literally half of the alumni in my area have the same last name.</p>
<p>and hes going to UMich</p>
<p>ewwww UMich... of course as an Ohioan I'm a bit biased</p>
<p>i heard that if not for legacies, 1/3 of the student body would not be there</p>
<p>If the faculty was hired with the deal that her/his kids can get reduced/free tuition if they get in, that is sort of part of the parent's compensation package so the admission office would have to give them a tip...probably higher than a legacy tip.</p>
<p>No reduced tuition deal for Yale faculty.</p>
<p>JohnC--I don't know if you're being serious or trying to be provocative. If you need me to find the source and pull the quote I can, but President Levin has stated that legacies have, on average, higher numbers than non-legacies. </p>
<p>I value my anonymity on this board, but I'd love to post about people who haven't gotten into Yale as wealthy legacies. It would also be unfair to the people who didn't get in to post their names, but it would blow your mind.</p>
<p>Not even breaks for kid of really old faculty at Yale?</p>
<p>I know several wealthy Yalie-kids that were rejected and probably fell within the acceptable range of grades and SAT's for the applicant pool. No idea how generous the parents had been over the years though, some colleges like annual bequests over many years, not a big one in the year of application.</p>
<p>Really old faculty probably don't have college age kids!</p>
<p>I know someone at Columbia admissions who said the faculty there get breaks so the kids get in easier. Maybe Columbia attracts better faculty!</p>
<p>AdmissionsAddict is right. I know a couple of wealthy legacy kids who didn't get in the year my D did, at least one of whom had superb stats, etc. We were surprised, assuming it might be the other way around.</p>
<p>A wealthy legacy kid from my school last year got in RD. He was an intelligent guy with high SAT I scores and was also a fairly good musician, but aside from that he was not outstanding... I'm pretty sure he got a legacy tip.</p>
<p>I'm wondering if everyone on this thread has the same definition of superb stats when wondering why a legacy did or didn't get in.... on several threads on CC, I find people identifying low 700s or below as high scores on the SAT I and II, which is not at all the case for the HYPS pools. I personally am not aware of any HYPS legacies with over 770 in <em>all</em> their SATs (I and II) and good if not stellar ECs and strong if not stellar recs who were not accepted into their respective colleges (but I know lots of non-legacies with that profile who were denied), so I am wondering if we are all working off the same assumptions....</p>
<p>And I'm quite sure it's the case that legacies have higher numbers on average, but it's also the case that when the overall average is computed, it includes athletes, URMs, and other categories who generally score lower. For the same socio-economic level and the same EC profile, I doubt that holds true, demonstrating the axiom that "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.." :)</p>
<p>The alumni I interviewed with told me just how fair the process is. Yale's admissions process changed after a revamp in the 1960s. No longer was it possible to get an admissions advantage from being rich, well-connected, a star athlete, a legacy, or good-looking :P No guarenteed admit anyways (though those attributes obviously help elsewhere). In fact, his son was rejected even though he was, as he put it, the person they'd "most likely have broken the rules for". He was, what, the president of his class, star player for the hockey and baseball team, director of Athletics, etc, etc. But still, no advantage - just the way he wanted it. (His son, not at all interested in Yale and declining a transfer when given the opportunity, went on to Williams and now teaches at Harvard ha.)</p>
<p>So yeah, the process at Yale seems pretty fair to say the least, though perhaps not perfect.</p>
<p>hmmm... it's not too surprising that the person in question didn't get in if those were his attributes, since he was a star in his school but apparently had not gained recognition at a broader level, but it's definitely not the case that athletics is not a strong hook at Yale IF you are being recruited by a coach. There are many athletes at Yale (and at HYPS in general) who would not have been admitted on the strength of their app alone if the app had not been flagged as a recruited athlete app. However, just being a great athlete isn't enough at any school - the coach needs to want your specific skill set at that specific school that specific year.</p>
<p>Which isn't to say they don't have excellent students who are also athletes, or that no athletes would have been admitted without being recruited, or that it's unfair that certain classes of applicants get a thumb on the scales (URMs, athletes, and development cases all do.) </p>
<p>As do legacies - the Yale dir of admissions is on record in a recent book as saying so, but it's not a guaranteed admit, as you say. You have to be a strong applicant, but as they say, if you are, you will be admitted over comparably qualified students who are not legacies.</p>
<p>To clarify what I wrote - those attributes apply to the alumni, who is a very active member of the Yale community.</p>
<p>Exactly what is considered a low GPA? <3.5? For SAT's, is less than 1420/1600 low?</p>
<p>dz2--It depends on the high school, but I'd say anything below 3.75 is low for a high school with average grade inflation.</p>
<p>How naive you would be to underestimate legacy advantage...anywhere. And how naive to think that only large donor legacies have an advantage. Legacies represent huge potential in loyalty and future $. Even if their parents are not huge donors, the new seed may be. Legacies get special treatment, and, according to Yale's own letter, they are accepted at 30% during SCEA alone.</p>
<p>I don't think I'm naive and I think lots of people way overestimate the legacy advantage. It is true that legacies are accepted at a higher rate than non-legacy applicants. However, I think this correlates with the nature and nurture you get from having Yale parents. I don't think legacy status itself is the cause of admissions except when parents have been exceptional donors. I bet the children of HYSM parents do almost comparably well to Yale legacy kids. As I've posted before, legacy kids have higher stats than non-legacy kids. While I agree that you can manipulate statistics, I think there is something to this. Again, if people could seen legacies I've seen be rejected (yes, I know their stats and they were not bottom 25% of admitted students), then they might not see legacy as such a huge advantage.</p>
<p>AdmissionsAddict,
My apologies. My comments were not directed at your individual post, but at the flavor of the opines........</p>
<p>oldyale--No apologies needed. I'm not trying to be confrontational. Just a different viewpoint on how much weight legacy status confers.</p>