Legacy REJECTS

<p>Well said, Redbeard. You express my feelings exactly. I do think this is one of those things that must be experienced first-hand in order to understand the emotional impact. I also understand coureur's sentiment of acknowledging and repaying a debt through donating. For most parents, it is hard to not feel hurt when your child is hurt, and to want to nurture all that nurtures your child. Or, in coureur's case, supporting that which has supported you. That is human nature. It plays out in every arena of life. But, back to my original post, there are ways to be sensitive about the process and ways to be insensitive. In our case, the school in question was quite insensitive with their fundraising call on the heels of the rejection. I am impressed with the alumni relations activities of other schools which have been mentioned in this thread (Brown; UVa)~~their approach reflects not only progressive business practices, but good manners.</p>

<p>Both my husband and I went to Brown, so I can address how Brown handles legacy admits. </p>

<p>Brown asks that anyone who deals with alumni let the admissions office know of legacy applicants. I am a volunteer in the admissions process and I complete a form each fall listing interviewers whose kids are applying. If I have a particularly active/dedicated alum, I indicate that. Next year, if my daughter applies, I will call my contacts on campus to tell them about her application and ask them to notify admissions.</p>

<p>Legacy students have traditionally been accepted at a higher rate at Brown. However, Brown has begun changing this policy. Last year, ED acceptance rate for legacy was 54 percent; this year it was 39 percent. There are more legacy applicants now – but I also believe this is a policy change coming from above. </p>

<p>I remember soon after I graduated reading a letter to the editor in the alumni magazine from an alum who was furious that his kid was rejected. I remember thinking – just grow up. Twenty-five years later, I am much more sympathetic.</p>

<p>My daughter, now a HS junior, has been to Brown countless times, stayed in the dorms, even participated in graduation more times than most alumni. She loves the place, and wants to go. I loved Brown, and I’d like her to go. We always assumed that if she did well in school, and had good credentials, she had a better-than-average change of acceptance as a legacy – and the numbers used to back us up. But the numbers have changed, almost overnight – and that’s a hard adjustment to make. Especially realizing that if she were applying five or ten years ago, she would have been accepted. Especially realizing that if she were male, she might be accepted (see relevant thread on the NY Times op-ed piece on female students).</p>

<p>It’s very easy to be removed from the situation and tell me that if she is rejected I should continue to give them money and continue my volunteer efforts. But it is a lot more difficult to do that in reality. Sometimes it is hard to control an emotional reaction. I know I shouldn’t be upset about it – but I will be upset. I can’t rationalize that away. </p>

<p>I simply cannot imagine continuing to volunteer for admissions after this year, unless my daughter gets accepted. The thought of interviewing other students – nope, sorry, can’t do that. I may or may not continue my other volunteer efforts. As for giving them money – since I won’t have much disposable income during the four years she’s in school, it’s doubtful I would give much anyway. After that – perhaps time will blunt the edge. I can’t predict what I will feel and think that far in the future.</p>

<p>I do think that rejecting legacy applicants can have a negative impact. As others have said here – they aren’t anxious to give money to their alma mater if a qualified kid is rejected. (Is the alumni-giving rate part of the US News ranking formula?) I know that every time the son or daughter of one of my interviewers is rejected, I lose an interviewer (I stand to lose several this year). That’s not good. Brown’s alumni advising service is wonderful, and I greatly appreciate it. But if she doesn’t go there, I will be disappointed. If that happens, my challenge will be making sure she knows that it’s not her fault, but the fault of the process and demographics.</p>

<p>Do you think that colleges categorize alumni into groups depending on the amount of their contributions?</p>

<p>I think what's hard about this is that the rules are changing mid-game. Students at these schools today experienced a more competitive process to get there and don't have a decade of dressing their firstborn in the school colors. They likely won't have the expectation that their parents understandingly had. It must be that small alumni contributions don't amount to enough for schools to pay close attention.</p>

<p>lfk: "Do you think that colleges categorize alumni into groups depending on the amount of their contributions?"</p>

<p>They would be dumb not to look at that. Do you think any college turns down a <em>qualified</em> legacy whose parents/grandparents are 5 or 6 figure (or more) annual donors?</p>

<p>Actually, the percentage of contributions, both small and large does affect the college. D has been making fundraising calls to alumni and the student solicitors were told that the size of the donation doesn't matter as much (well, of course they want more) but the percentage of participation does, because so many grants and federal funds are determined by the percentage of alumni contributions. So, when she was calling 2005 grads who said they couldn't donate yet because they just started working, and had loans to pay off, etc., she told them even $5 or $1 would be a help. So, they have quite a few donations of just this little amount, which will help raise an additional many thousands of dollars for the school. So, just because someone isn't a large donor doesn't mean they aren't a large donor. Those $100 a year or less contributions bring in much more money than that every year to the school in matching funds, grants based on alumni percentages of contributions, etc. Rejecting legacies of parents who donate smaller amounts will affect these types of grants, etc.</p>

<p>sly_vt,
Thanks for the stats on Brown's recent legacy admits. Last year, a friend's child (with parental legacy) was deferred ED and ultimately waitlisted. A brilliant, ultra-talented kid. The mom was furious and I am sure has cut back on her support for Brown. The child was accepted RD by Harvard and took his/her name off the Brown waitlist.</p>

<p>I really think expecting donations to correlate to admission for one's children is just wrong. You are donating because you loved your alma mater and want it to flourish. It is simply selfish for one to stop donating just because of a rejection. Legacy is a factor in admissions as is everything else is in admissions. You should not expect your children to get in just because you went there. In this competitive world of college admissions nothing can be taken as granted and expecting admissions just because of legacy i think is just arrogant and wrong.</p>

<p>Imiracle, I agree that expecting to get in "just because of legacy" is unrealistic. I think what outrages alums is when their otherwise extremely-qualified legacy applicant does not get in. (Such as the student in post #87 above.) A lot of schools are well aware of this, and take care to make alumni aware of what their child's chances are. My alma mater (with one of the very highest alumni giving rates - around 60%) does this.</p>

<p>When you are a parent and you love your child, it's must be incredibly hard to be objective. </p>

<p>Therefore, I don't think it is wrong for parents who are legacies, have donated money, to have these kinds of expectations. </p>

<p>I don't think it is necessarily an arrogant and wrongful mentality.</p>

<p>The parents' reactions after legacy rejections are just indications of their love for their children and the unparalleled desire for them to succeed in everything.</p>

<p>However the thing is many extremely-qualified regular domestic applicants don't get in either. So to some extent it is fair.
benzene: Most parents love their children and all have expectations of their children getting in and are upset when they don't. So i understand parents getting upset over rejections, but most parents whether legacy or not get upset as well. And besides you gotta get over it somehow, you can't live just hating that school just because they denied your child/ren. Sometime you have to understand that competitive admissions process applies to everyone and these things happen. However, does that necessarily diminish the memories you had at your alma mater? No and i think this is the only reason you should be donating.</p>

<p>imiracle,</p>

<p>Agreed, however, what if it at least "appears" to be irrational that a certain legacy was rejected. For example, a student who was above the 75th percentile in SAT scores for the school and had a GPA/class rank that was more than acceptable? It is examples like these where I think many legacy parents would have an issue.</p>

<p>The real issue is how do you explain it? It can be the difference between "appearances" and objectivity. It is often hard to be objective when it comes to your own children.</p>

<p>imiracle911:</p>

<p>I understand what you mean. </p>

<p>I really wish that schools did not have legacy acceptances or affirmative action acceptances and based everything on merit. </p>

<p>I'm currently a fourth year in college, and my both of my parents were immigrants. Merit was the only thing that got me in anywhere. </p>

<p>However, if I ever have children, and they've applied to my undergrad school where I am donating, I would be offended if the school rejected them. </p>

<p>It may seem like a selfish reaction, but it's human nature. I would not donate anymore money because what is the purpose? I may have loved my school. But I would most likely love my children more. Besides, I would be already paying tuition else where.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Agreed, however, what if it at least "appears" to be irrational that a certain legacy was rejected. For example, a student who was above the 75th percentile in SAT scores for the school and had a GPA/class rank that was more than acceptable?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>the problem with this argument is that MANY decisions at the most selective schools can be viewed at irrational. we see threads here ALL the time about kids with outstanding credentials who can't understand why they didn't get into a top school when someone they know with seemingly less credentials gets in. at the top schools, kids in the 75 pecentiles are still often rejected WELL over 50% of the time. see eg. <a href="http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Admission/gettoknowus/factsandfigures.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Admission/gettoknowus/factsandfigures.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>admissions has gotten increasingly competitive. we have seen how the "advantage" of applying ED has become less and less of an advantage as the competition increases. it should come as not surprise that the "advantage" of legacy may also become less and less of an advantage.</p>

<p>every parent wants what is best for their child. but every parent also does their child the greatest favor by being realistic. part of that realism may be the understanding that legacy today may not get you where legacy might have gotten you some years ago.</p>

<p>Besides the issues of applicant qualification and legacy, I think there is another issue affecting alumni donations. That is, do the alumni agree with the current decisions being made by the university and the direction in which the university is going. Personally, I would not donate to a school that rejected my qualified student, seemingly randomly. Nor would I support a school based only upon the fact that I had a good time and a good education 30 years ago. My desire to donate would have a lot to do with how I perceived my money would be used TODAY.</p>

<p>For many, it's more a practical matter - we don't have tons of money to donate to any cause, so either because we're tapped out paying tuition at the institution that DID accept our child, or grateful for the opportunities we see available on the campus we are visiting, you could say we're being 'forward looking' rather than dwelling on the past (where we received our own education and at an institution that no longer has a strong hold on us). I think we're talking about parents, for the most part, who can't donate to every worthy cause and need to be selective. Look at it this way, it's not that the alma mater isn't deserving, it's just that there are so many pleas for donations and funds are limited. We would love to be able to donate to the alma mater, but we've found another candidate who better fits our charitable goals this year. Perhaps in the future we'll be in a position to donate to alma mater so they could ask again next year.</p>

<p>Not unlike the process the colleges go through themselves when they admit/reject candidates. I don't think parents are holding on to a pathological anger towards their alma mater, they make the decision whether to donate and move on.</p>

<p>So true. We, as a group, donate to all kinds of organizations besides colleges: symphonies, ballet theaters, museums, churches, YMCA, scouting, homeless shelters, humane societies, etc. Everyone has to pick and choose.</p>

<p>I think most people are just looking for some consideration when their child is applying to their alma mater. I haven't read any post saying that their child should be admitted -- as a legacy -- regardless of qualifications. We all understand the competitive nature of the admissions process. But I don't think it's too much to expect colleges to contact or waitlist legacy families, to give them a heads-up before a rejection. It's just the way friends treat friends, and that's what alumni support is about.</p>

<p>Why is a courtesy waitlisting so important to you guys? The end result is the same. College admissions is not a good time to seek ego-stroking.</p>

<p>The other thing to realize is that schools push this family spirit. Most colleges sell baby bibs and sweatshirts and sippy cups emblazoned with the school logo. Brown makes nametags for alumni that say "Class of '75, P' 09" -- the P stands for Parent. </p>

<p>Colleges market themselves all the time, trying to get more qualified kids to apply -- and then go on to deny admission to most of those kids. It just stings a little more when they reach out to alumni, and then deny their kids.</p>

<p>unbelievablem, you are both rational and logical. I may agree with you in theory, but not in practice. If you or a family member were an employee of a nonprofit and it fired you or your relative, would you write it a check? Volunteer for it during the holidays?</p>

<p>Colleges expect alumni to make donations based on their affection and they do everything they can to maintain that affection and goodwill. Really big donors may base their giving on tax benefits and the desire to see their name on a building, but I'll bet most of the small contributions are based on pure emotion. If something happens to dampen or sour that emotion -- well, there are lots of other good causes that one can give money and time to that make one feel good. Alumni stop giving money when the college goes co-ed, when a favorite professor is not given tenure, when a playing field is paved to become a parking lot. Just read the letters in the alumni magazine to learn some of the reasons. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the development people are pulling out their hair during admission season if they see legacy admit percentages drop.</p>

<p>And it is true that the percentage of alumni that give is very important. I've worked on enough reunions to affirm that. I was just curious whether that percentage played into the US News rankings.</p>