<p>At our reunion (not Yale), one of my former classmates not so jokingly suggested that all alums withhold any donations to the college until their kids apply. That just might make the school sit up and notice. My alma mater, too, is now getting so many legacy kids applying that they are turning down kids who are definitely accept material. They are edging to the % of legacies that they do not want to be for diversity reasons.</p>
<p>Legacy admits are not a scam per se, it's the bait and reject that's the scam.</p>
<p>It's not bait-and-reject... even more qualified applicants (1600, 4.0uw) are turned down at Yale who are not legacies. It is obvious from the numbers (30% versus 9%) that Yale doesn't bait anyone... there is a preference for legacies. Just not as much as at Harvard (40% versus 8%).</p>
<p>URM preference may be a scam, legacy preference for non-donor alums is probably a scam, but Yale accepting 30% of legacies when you think it should be even higher is surely not a scam.</p>
<p>At our reunion (not Yale), one of my former classmates not so jokingly suggested that all alums withhold any donations to the college until their kids apply.</p>
<p>By the same token, schools should probably withhold all acceptance letters to any and all legacies until the alum family "shows them the money". Hehe.</p>
<p>Just curious, Yale.edu--are you a Yale senior now, or living in New Haven between college and law school?</p>
<p>Oh, sorry - my profile is actually not "me"... it's supposed to about Yale because of my website handle.... Here's the full thing.</p>
<p>Biography: Second-oldest Ivy, but best undergraduate experience. First U.S. system of residential colleges.
Location: New Haven, Connecticut (U.S.A.)
Interests: Admitting the best students of the world.
Occupation: Educating the best students of the world.</p>
<p>I didn't go to Yale, but I did live in a residential college! I'd love to have gone to a school where that was the norm instead of my fratville public university.</p>
<p>Yale.edu, that is what someone was saying in that newsletter linked on this thread. Actually, many alums from the top schools make it a point to donate something, not every year and not huge amounts, but something. At least at my alma mater the alum participation and donation rates are pretty high. Though it has not come up as an issue for us, I can say that it would give me a bad taste about donating a dime more, if one of my kids who was definitely in the midstream of the applicant pool, or higher, were not accepted. But the celebrity/development alums seem to get their kids into their alma maters even if they are a bit under the bar. So I think the schools that get a bit testy, and say things like, "why not just make it a bidding process", (a like comment also in that same article) are a bit out of line, as it is, in sense, just that.</p>
<p>I can say that it would give me a bad taste about donating a dime more, if one of my kids who was definitely in the midstream of the applicant pool, or higher, were not accepted.</p>
<p>Probably 90% of Yale's applicant pool is in the midstream of admits, and they only accept 9.9%. So one might say only 1 in 9 of midstream admits (1500 SAT, 3.9 uw GPA) actually gets in. For legacies, it's probably more than 1 in 3.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Probably 90% of Yale's applicant pool is in the midstream of admits, and they only accept 9.9%.
[/quote]
That would mean that the those rejected have a median SAT of about 1480 and are almost indistinguishable as a group from those they admit. This sounds implausible. Princeton can't take all the Yale non-admits...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Probably 90% of Yale's applicant pool is in the midstream of admits, and they only accept 9.9%. So one might say only 1 in 9 of midstream admits (1500 SAT, 3.9 uw GPA) actually gets in. For legacies, it's probably more than 1 in 3.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, this can't be true. Even in the Harvard pool, only about 55% of the students have above a 700 M, and only about 50% of the students have above a 700 V, according to former senior Harvard Admissions Officer Chuck Hughes (as documented in What it Really Takes to Get into the Ivy League). </p>
<p>Suggesting that 90% of Yale's applicants have at least a 1500 SAT score and a 3.9 GPA is actually preposterous. Not even a Yale admissions officer would try to pretend that something like that were true.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>From the Gazette article about the 2009 Harvard pool:</p>
<p>" ...nearly 11,000 of the applicants have an SAT verbal score of 700 or above and well over 12,000 have an SAT math score at that level. Almost 2,100 have an SAT verbal score of 800, while nearly 3,100 achieved an 800 in their SAT math test."</p>
<p>From the Yale Admissions newsletter about the Class of 2008:</p>
<p>"...it may be of interest to note that nearly 1,800 applicants scored a perfect 800 on the verbal section of the SAT I, and almost 2,260 received 800 on the
math section."</p>
<p>Byerly, you remembered how to link! Can you please link to the "other site" where you got the Levin quote please? We couldn't find it earlier, but you said "now I see the link" and then disappeared without linking it for us. Thanks in advance! </p>
<p>Don't disappear again now...</p>
<p>Suggesting that 90% of Yale's applicants have at least a 1500 SAT score and a 3.9 GPA is actually preposterous. Not even a Yale admissions officer would try to pretend that something like that were true.</p>
<p>Yeah, I shouldn't have defined the term so narrowly. I suspect that most alumni parents who get in a huff about their kids not getting in have kids who did not score 1500 on the SAT or have 3.9 uw GPAs. Most alumni parents would probably consider 1400 to be a "mainstream admit", and even then using the stats provided, Yale would have to accept almost 50% of the general applicant pool instead of 9.9% to accept all of those students.</p>
<p>I suspect that Harvard has a very strong legacy preference system at the expense of all other applicants (40% acceptance rate for legacies, 8% for everyone else) whereas Yale has a more merit-based one (30% for legacies, 9% for others). 5x preference at Harvard, 3x preference at Yale (x not necessarily representing the unbiased acceptance rate, but rather just a variable).</p>
<p>I really doubt that even 40% of Harvard alums who are Byerly's age could get into Harvard if they got their scores today, so assuming that their kids would score better is slightly insane. I don't think that Harvard publishes their historic SAT averages, but Yale's was in the 1200s when many alumni attended the school. All of these alumni with 1200 SATs, are we to believe that 40% of their kids score in the 1500 range?</p>
<p>Here is something that does put legacy admissions in a different perspective for those like me who are quick to jump on it...</p>
<p>"In (the University of) Virginia's last major fund-raising campaign, which ended four years ago, 65.4 percent of legacy alumni donated, giving an average of nearly $34,800 each, compared with just 41.1 percent of non-legacy alumni, giving an average of about $4,100 each."</p>
<p>As far as the Early Action candidates, here are some stats from the other thread. This is taken from the small sample size of those Yale EA candidates on CC.</p>
<p>Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of admits: 770 (~1540 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of deferreds: 755 (~1510 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of rejecteds: 750 (~1500 SAT)</p>
<p>Interesting. Thanks for doing the figures.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As far as the Early Action candidates, here are some stats from the other thread. This is taken from the small sample size of those Yale EA candidates on CC.</p>
<p>Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of admits: 770 (~1540 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of deferreds: 755 (~1510 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of rejecteds: 750 (~1500 SAT)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yale.edu, College Confidential is definitely not typical of the general applicant pool.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I really doubt that even 40% of Harvard alums who are Byerly's age could get into Harvard if they got their scores today, so assuming that their kids would score better is slightly insane. I don't think that Harvard publishes their historic SAT averages, but Yale's was in the 1200s when many alumni attended the school. All of these alumni with 1200 SATs, are we to believe that 40% of their kids score in the 1500 range?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just to mention something else, I know some people feel that legacy students are better candidates for a school because their parents likely did well at the school, and intelligence is inherited. This is actually one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, because even with re-centering, I suspect that the average SAT for Yale acceptees 30 years ago was only still a 1300. The Yale applicant pool has gotten much, much more competitive, and so therefore, kids of 1300-type students who only do somewhat better (aka 1400) should really NOT be admitted. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of admits: 770 (~1540 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of deferreds: 755 (~1510 SAT)
Average SAT-I or SAT-II section of rejecteds: 750 (~1500 SAT)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, for starters, College Confidential is an anomaly when it comes to SAT scores. I can almost assure you that many of those particular high SAT scorers that got rejected or defered from Yale will be admitted to the Lesser Five or another top school even just based on stastics. However, they may not necessarily show the particular depth of passion or drive that it takes to be a Yale student. And maybe they weren't a legacy or URM of some sort. They're a little bit different than the average Joe applying to Yale. They DO at least have the numbers.</p>
<p>However, I can definitely tell you that there are large groups of students with 1300 and 1400 SAT scores that have absolutely no chance in hell at Yale. Simply put, not even a spectacular essay (which such a kid would most likely not write) and very strong recommendations (which such a kid would most likely not have) can save a rich white kid from New Jersey with a 1300. The only things that could pull the said student through would be a few major national awards in a field that Yale REALLY needs, or being a star recruited athlete in a very important sport.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>Maybe the biggest difference is that 35+ years ago Yale was all male. Alhough the size of class has gone up a little, the addition of females has effectively made it twice as hard to get in than in many parents' time, even if there were no other changes.</p>
<p>I would say that she has a slim chance of getting into Yale--The problem is that 2005-2006 have seen a huge increase in the number of graduating seniors----They can have the pick of the crop, and unfortunately, I would say that at least 80% of Yale's applicants have better stats then her. Now if you had given 50,000 a year, that would probably get her in. We call that rich man's welfare--unfortunately you aren't rich!</p>
<p>
[quote]
I would say that at least 80% of Yale's applicants have better stats then her.
[/quote]
Doubtful. Only about half of the applicants score above 700 on V and only slightly more above 700 on M. She is at the median in V and a 670 M for a female is pretty strong. Also, a 3.5 GPA at a respected private school (upper 10% of class) shows serious smarts. Assuming she has good recs I'd say she's strong. Also, while $1000 a year isn't incredible, it's been long-going, and that kind of loyalty is what they say matters more than the guy who gives $5000 the year before his kid applies. Over 30 years that's also $30K, which isn't peanuts. I say she's in, if, and a big if, the legacy hook and alum giving means what the schools say it does.</p>
<p>I agreed with everything you just posted mensa until you said "I say she's in". She probably has something like a 15-30% chance IMO, even with the legacy (which isn't exactly a "hook" per se at any of these schools, not like URM status or anything) and giving. It is doubtful that she is more qualified than the average Legacy applicant, of which about 30% are accepted. Without legacy or donations, I'd say she would have been a longshot, with something like 5% chance. So she has a chance, and is no longshot, but she's definitely not "in".</p>
<p>To be "in", she needs a SAT score above 1500 and a real "hook" among her activities, not just the legacy mini-hook.</p>
<p>Just to mention something else, I know some people feel that legacy students are better candidates for a school because their parents likely did well at the school, and intelligence is inherited. This is actually one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, because even with re-centering, I suspect that the average SAT for Yale acceptees 30 years ago was only still a 1300. The Yale applicant pool has gotten much, much more competitive, and so therefore, kids of 1300-type students who only do somewhat better (aka 1400) should really NOT be admitted.</p>
<p>I couldn't agree more. People in this thread who think that the acceptance rate of H and P legacies would be the same 30% just haven't thought about this concept. Going to Harvard, Yale, and Princeton 30 years ago was NOT the same as it is today. The kids have to be much more talented than their parents to get into their parents' Ivy today.</p>