<p>cba, I’ve seen statistics like those before, but are they corrected for the qualifications of the applicants?</p>
<p>If legacies tend to be more qualified than typical applicants, then only a portion of their higher admit rate would be directly due to the legacy preference. </p>
<p>Also, legacies may be more likely to apply ED than non-legacies. As discussed in this thread, ED, in itself, gives a student an admissions advantage at many colleges. So some of the “legacy” preference might really be an ED preference.</p>
<p>And I’ve got to believe that legacy applicants who meet the admissions bar AND are potential development admits get admitted at a very high rate vs. the average kid. If you’ve been giving generously to your own alma mater for 25 years, the college knows who you are and can assume you’d be amenable to a meeting “down the road” once little Suzie or Timmy has a fantastic freshman year. </p>
<p>That was really the point I was making earlier. Legacy matters (at least at Brown, and at least from my classmates experience) when it’s coupled with something else the school wants and needs. So yes- to use Pizza’s statistics… 70% are rejected vs. 90% rejected. And my guess is that if your kid is the BWRK offspring of a social worker married to a librarian and probably needs aid to attend, even in a need-blind admissions environment, your double legacy kid may not exactly be getting a hand on the scale (more like the feather.)</p>
<p>When is it a slam dunk? Again, when legacy is coupled with something else the college needs. Big time donor family. Extreme athletic prowess, artistic, etc. and stats within range. </p>
<p>So pull out the legacy kids who have that something else from the pool and look at the rest… my guess is that’s why 70% of legacies are rejected. Mom and Dad banking on something which is a mere tip, noting more.</p>
<p>Legacy status can be a lead fishing weight in certain circumstances. When I applied to my parents’ Ivy League alma mater, I was told by the admission officer I had a 50% chance of admission (now that was 35 years ago, I grant you!). Yes, you must be qualified, but in general, you need only the qualifications of the bottom 25% of those admitted provided your parents are doers, donors, or door openers. More recently in my son’s class, among equally talented/accomplished applicants of the same race, the Harvard double legacy got into Harvard, the Princeton legacy got into Princeton, and neither got into any other HYPS. Non-legacy Asians and White were not admitted unless they were athletic recruits or unique hook. URM’s with good but lesser credentials were admitted to multiple schools. Interestingly, many legacies did not have to do the alumni interview at the legacy school. Do expect a call from the development office the year in which your legacy child is applying, often for a home visit to “update you” on the latest at your alma mater. The interesting thing I learned is that outside of HYPS legacies, many top 20 college legacies were accepted but ultimately chose another school after their parents had moved the moon and stars to get them in.</p>
<p>AlmaPater, in my world my experience is significantly different. In recent years, I have seen a Yale legacy rejected by Yale and accepted by Harvard and Oxford, a Yale legacy accepted literally everywhere she applied, including Harvard and Princeton, a third-generation Princeton legacy rejected by Princeton (early!) and accepted by Harvard, a Harvard legacy accepted at HYPSM.</p>
<p>And w/re cba’s admission rates – the 30% admission rate for legacies at Harvard is really impressive until you find out that, when they calculated their admission rate for Yale and Princeton legacies, it was essentially the same.</p>
<p>I’ve seen similar things as JHS, the really star students who get into their legacy HYPMS get into at least one other school on that list. Not my kid though. :D</p>
<p>post #107 is just not true. A lot of schools care about alumni’s involvement. It could be hosting events, interviews, giving lectures, employment referrals. I know at my kid’s school, those legacies are put in a separate pile and they are given “special tours” when visiting the school. My kids’ weren’t legacies, but my brother’s kids were and they were treated differently.</p>
<p>I agree with NatSat to some extent–it’s to the colleges’ advantage for alumni to think that legacy advantage is greater than it is, and for everybody else to think that it’s less than it is. This is why they aren’t very specific about what it is, exactly.</p>
<p>My S’s school was explicit and released the admit rate for legacies vs total. This is a few years back, so I want to say it was something like 30% vs 15% - I could be off on the precise numbers, but that’s order of magnitude. In any case, knowing that my kid had a 70% chance of being rejected versus an 85% chance of being rejected didn’t feel one bit different to me. That, to me, is still a feather and I cannot comprehend how anyone can actually view it as anything even remotely approaching a “big advantage.” I carry my umbrella whether it’s a 70% chance of rain or an 85% chance.</p>
<p>Sure, if there were two applicants, and one was a legacy and the other wasn’t, you’d bet on the legacy if you knew absolutely nothing else about them. But that doesn’t actually mean that any particular legacy has a better chance at admissions vs. any particular non-legacy. To know that, you’d need a lot more facts. If it’s really the case that H takes H, P, and Y legacies at about the same rate, that’s pretty suggestive.</p>
<p>Legacies don’t get put into a separate pile and discussed relative to one another, though. It just gets noted as part of the discussion about them - “Joe is from Smallville, has X GPA and test scores, is interested in blah blah blah, has demonstrated leadership in blah blah blah. His essay reveals he’s blah blah blah. He’s also a legacy - his mother went here.”</p>
<p>By legacies, I mean “everyday legacies” (like my son was), not legacies where the parents are major donors or volunteers or otherwise important to the university.</p>
From what I’ve seen being a legacy won’t make a difference if you aren’t qualified, but if you are one of the thousands of bright well rounded kids in the top 30% or so of the application pool applying to super selective universities being a legacy *will *help. That doesn’t mean I don’t know at least some well qualified legacies (like my niece, 3rd in her class, good scores, great recommendations, nice ECs) still get rejected despite being a double legacy. There’s hardly anyone who is a shoe-in at a place like Harvard, being a legacy as well as a student with all the goods really does make a difference, but it’s not a huge difference.</p>
<p>I don’t know how many times we have to say over and over again that the majority of legacies applying to highly selective colleges will get rejected.</p>
<p>There is no overarching super-committee that dictates admissions standards to colleges. Some care more about SATs than others; some put more emphasis on ECs; and some put a lot of emphasis on legacies. You simply cannot make sweeping statements about how “colleges” treat legacies, as they all have their own policies. </p>
<p>From what I’ve seen, schools that are really into having alumni involvement and school spirit are generally the ones that give more weight to legacy status.</p>
<p>One of the questions to ask is, “What would the school lose by not admitting the student?” If Grandpa graduated from the school and has donated a grand total of $500 over the past 40 years the school’s not risking much by not admitting the granddaughter. If the kid’s a double legacy with parents who regularly donate and organize class events, host fundraising dinners or give alumni interviews the school is risking significantly more. If the family has extremely deep pockets, consistently donates a significant amount, and has the potential to endow a building the school’s risking a great deal.</p>
<p>There are legacies, then there are Legacies.</p>
<p>Of course what would be considered a “significant” level of donation varies depending on the school. An amount large enough to get the admissions committee at a small, underfunded LAC to sit up and take notice might be a rounding error at a place like Harvard.</p>