legacy admit stats?

<p>My daughter is a legacy at one of the HYPS schools she is applying to, and the way I think about that is it removes the randomness from the decision - we all know very strong applicants who are denied, with very high scores, grades, and strong ECs, just because there are so many great applicants. My sense of the 'legacy advantage' is simply that it makes outcomes much less random - a lot of super non-legacy applicants get denied, very few super legacies (none that I know of) are.</p>

<p>Super Legacies are rarely denied. However, some ordinary legacies also get in if the family is considered "strong." In other words, Legacy parents who have been active in raising a lot of money for the school or giving big sums of money directly are told by their connections to make sure that their students are "in the range." This is one reason why the private tutoring business has taken off, with top New York City tutors charging $300 to $750 an hour. Insane.</p>

<p>Regardless of what anecdotes or admission rates you consider, the bottom line is that legacies don't really have an advantage. It is true that the average legacy may be somewhat more successful than the average non-legacy applicant, but that has more to do with their preparation for college-level work.</p>

<p>If the parents donated millions of dollars to the school (i.e., enough to pay for hundreds of other students' financial aid) and their kids are good students, then yes, but that is actually a VERY small number of people you're talking about each year compared to the 1,500-2,000 people who are admitted. Probably about 10 students or less.</p>

<p>Even considering all legacies put together, you only have about 14% of the entering class. That's similar to the proportion of students from families whose parents never went to college at all -- if anything, that's a larger "advantage" in admissions than being a legacy is, because it might show that due to your innate work ethic and ingenuity, you've managed to really stand out from all the other students who came from families whose parents never went to college -- students who as a group, generally don't do as well.</p>

<p>This is true for Yale, though, which is the most selective Ivy League school (especially in terms of taking just the very top students) and also one of the smallest ones in terms of class size. At almost every other "elite" school, there is much more "room" in the class and a much higher acceptance rate (especially for the top students, since the pool itself also isn't nearly as "cream of the cream of the cream"), so legacies have an advantage going in. </p>

<p>On a similar note, Yale and just a couple of other schools are the only ones that are 100% need blind for all students, including internationals. If you are a wealthy international student, you have a much higher chance of getting into a place that isn't need blind (like Brown or BC) because, due to the limited amount of aid available, the adcom will greatly favor rich kids.</p>

<p>"...the bottom line is that legacies don't really have an advantage. It is true that the average legacy may be somewhat more successful than the average non-legacy applicant, but that has more to do with their preparation for college-level work."</p>

<p>"Even considering all legacies put together, you only have about 14% of the entering class. That's similar to the proportion of students from families whose parents never went to college at all..."</p>

<p>To test your hypothesis, it would be interesting to know the percent of kids at Yale whose parents would to Harvard. If that percent is similar to the percent of legacy, then mean that indeed, legacy holds little value and what mattered was that the child was more prepared for college work. I wonder...</p>

<p>^ You would have to adjust for the number of applicants, of course, but my guess is that after doing so, it would be quite similar.</p>

<p>I wish I were a legacy.</p>

<p>^^given Yale admissions has said they do give a legacy tip, I really would take their word for it. It may be nice to tell oneself otherwise, but doesn't square with their own statements.</p>

<p>I think the key word is tip. I see a lot of posters who think legacy status assumes the importance of a hook.</p>