<p>So i was wondering, how much influence does being a legacy actually have?
Is it a major hook or something that's just mildly considered?</p>
<p>Depends where. At ivies, the schools most on CC are concerned with, it more than doubles your chance–almost triple at Princeton. At many state schools it can’t be counted at all.</p>
<p>But you need to be a true legacy, and at many schools that means one of your parents was an grad of the undergraduate college.</p>
<p>You also need to apply early for the full advantage at schools that have early.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not always. Check individual school policies. </p>
<p>OP, the adcom at UPenn has said that legacy applicants are given one more read-through than other applicants, a policy that I imagine holds true at other top schools. This means you have one more shot to impress the adcoms, one more time for them to go, “Oh, that’s why we should accept serendipity.”</p>
<p>No, it’s very basic, if you do not show utter commitment as a legacy, no school will show it to you. Few schools print the sentiment.</p>
<p>
Redroses, what info is this based on? From what I’ve read that might have been true a couple of decades ago but the impact of legacy has been fading.</p>
<p>It’s based on class of 2009 acceptance rates for legacies vs. overall school.</p>
<p>Here’s an article from a couple of years ago.
[Top</a> Colleges Mum on Legacy Admissions - ABC News](<a href=“Top Colleges Mum on Legacy Admissions - ABC News”>Top Colleges Mum on Legacy Admissions - ABC News)</p>
<p>double or triple? wow i always thought that if an applicant had similar stats to a diff. applicant, the legacy would be chosen. I didn’t think that legacies actually got such a huge boost.
does the legacy influence still apply for people who haven’t donated to the school?</p>
<p>Realize that the people whose parents went to an Ivy League school will tend to be more qualified than the average applicant. So just because the acceptance rate is double doesn’t mean that being a legacy student doubles your chances.</p>
<p>Just toured most of the ivies with my D; some schools flat our said that legacies got preference (Dartmouth, Cornell) others said that legacies had a slightly higher acceptance rate because they are part of a better candidate pool. I think it is unfair to legacy kids that some assume they got in just because they are a legacy. It diminishes all the effort that kids put into being a successful candidate. My daughter has heard so many times “oh you will get into school X because you are a legacy.” Well, she is working her butt off, getting amazing grades and scores, and really making an impact. If she gets in she will have earned it!</p>
<p>
Care to link to this data redroses? I wasn’t aware that acceptance rates for legacy students only was provided by any college.</p>
<p>At elite schools, the advantage is very, very large. Princeton is not unusual, with a 42% admissions rate for the class of 2013, about 5 times the admissions rate of other applicants.</p>
<p>[The</a> trodden path: Applying as a legacy - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/05/12/26151/]The”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/05/12/26151/)</p>
<p>My rule of the thumb is that a legacy applicant in the middle of enrolled classes at elite schools on the numbers (SAT, etc), has an very good chance at admission, whereas an-unhooked applicant is out of the competition.
I will say that legacy students are stronger on the numbers than athletic recruits or URMs, stronger than administrators’ and professors’ kids, and way stronger than the celebrity, politician and big donor kids.</p>
<p>From Yale Daily News: Yale President Richard Levin noted that the average grades and test scores of admitted legacies are higher than the average grades and test scores of the rest of the class. And once they get to Yale, Levin said, legacies also tend to get higher grades than non-legacy students with comparable high school GPAs and test scores. The former admission officer agreed with Levin that the pool of legacy applicants is stronger than the pool of non-legacy applicants.</p>
<p>Therefore, the higher acceptance rates are justified.</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t buy it. I wouldn’t accept anything Levin says at face value. My previous post stands.
Question- just what do you suppose folks in such positions would say? What they do.</p>
<p>Let me add that I have been on two sides of this as a parent- applicant parent and student parent.
As a parent of students at two of the schools noted on this thread, legacy students are regarded by my kids as not very bright by their schools’ standards. The Princeton articles in the last week have dealt with the inferiority issues many legacy students deal with. These are not isolated feelings.
Of course there are student’s like my daughter’s legacy best friend, who was also admitted to Harvard and Yale. But to imagine that legacy admissions rates are as high as they are because the strength of the legacy pool? Nope.</p>
<p>Agree with Danas. What I’ve seen is legacies with median stats get in and don’t need the earth shaking ECs. They don’t take legacies that can’t make it through, but the spin is BS, many would not otherwise have had a shot. Others are well qualified and would have made it without the boost. Legacies tend to be from high income, education focused families that sent them to the best schools and had a high bar at home.</p>
<p>I have also observed that the legacy boost is directly relate to how much money the family has donated over the years and how much time they have given, i.e. alumni interviewing,etc. I would contend that all legacies are not created equal.</p>
<p>mnmomof2—you just told me in another thread that your daughter was not a legacy. Now here you are saying she is. So which is it? Strange.</p>