Legacy?

I have 2 brothers who are both Stanford Law alums, both were on Law Review, and both have gone on to distinguished careers [written up in the alum magazine, etc]. Daughter will be applying for undergrad this fall. Any point for her to mention this connection?

You can mention it, but will probably have little impact. Legacy advantage, for what it’s worth, is largely limited to parents who were undergrads.

fredthered that’s been my observation too watching who gets in and doesn’t among people I know (admittedly a very small fraction of the applicant pool). Officially, Stanford says graduate school alumni kids count as legacies for undergraduate admissions, but from what I’ve seen it seems to count for more with parents who are undergraduate alumni. Hard to parcel it out for sure as undergraduate alums probably also maintain stronger ties with the school, in general.

 I don't think legacy has much weight unless your family donates a lot of money. One of my parents and two of my grandparents graduated from Stanford undergrad (along with my Uncle) and I was waitlisted. 

I’ve read lots of debates in other threads about whether legacies should get an advantage or not. I think applicants should be judged based on merit. With that said, I am a qualified legacy. Perhaps I was waitlisted bc I’m legacy?

4.6 GPA with a 35 ACT.
All 5’s on AP classes last year.
Will have 8 AP classes total.
Lots of extracurriculars.
Captain of Varsity sport for two years-MVP, League Honors etc.
Founded a successful e-commerce website.
Eagle Scout.
White XY.
Essays were great.
Teacher recs 10 out of 10.

 I'm still glad I applied and don't feel horrible about not making it in because 44k people applied for 2k spots. The odds just aren't great. It must be incredibly difficult for the admission team to decide who is accepted and who isn't. 

 Good luck to your daughter! There is always a chance!!

@waitingforscores, I feel for you… you seem to have great stats and qualifications and as you noted, the competition to get in is just way too intense. Did you apply Early Action? My understanding is that with legacy status, applying Early Action gives an applicant the best chance.

An often mentioned data point is that on average legacy admission rate is 3X the general admission rate. My understanding is that the donation amount is not as important a factor as whether the alum stayed active and connected to the school, such as attending reunions, regional alum events, etc. I suppose donating would probably be a good indicator of staying connected as well but it doesn’t have to be eye-popping.

@edragonfly Applied RD. My dad is an active alum - attends reunions, Rose Bowls, in Stanford Alumni Magazine, etc. It’s all good. The kids accepted from my school are all first generation college so I’m happy for them.

@waitingforscores, thanks for the info. Sounds like you have a very strong record and will do well wherever you end up. Best of luck.

I have been following Stanford admissions for some time. I think there is a legacy advantage. It is minor but real. The admissions office acknowledges it is a “tip” factor, and I believe it is. Other evidence comes from classmates whose kids have been admitted to Stanford. There are a lot of them. To be sure, some would have been admitted without a legacy connection, but there are so many that it is likely there is boost. My guess is that the boost is similar to being the first member of your family to attend college.

I don’t know how important involvement with Stanford is to securing the legacy tip. I know a couple of instances where the parents really weren’t very involved. They might have attended a few reunions and gave less than $100 annually. Having said this, I think regular giving even of a modest amount and involvement on reunion committees can help on the margin. That’s my feeling, although I have no hard evidence.

I have a friend who is third generation Stanford, and his daughter is fourth generation Stanford. He has given reasonable amounts to Stanford, but his family (especially his father) were more substantial donors although certainly not a name you would recognize. He knows people in the development office at Stanford and asked them if there is a “magic level” of donations for getting a significant boost in admissions. If there is, he would consider going “over” that threshold. He was told there was no such threshold, although “involvement with Stanford helps.” (I’m not sure they would have told him the threshold if there was on.)

There is a widespread belief that to secure any legacy advantage, you need to apply early. I agree. This is true not just of Stanford but at other schools as well. Penn is explicit about it. Part of the reasoning is that legacies are familiar with the school. If they don’t apply early, it means they aren’t that interested and are unlikely to attend if admitted. Schools are fixated on their admit and yield rates, so this belief has consequences even if it is not true in a given situation.

Hope this information is of help to future applicants.