<p>Does anyone else think theres something wrong with this? BOTH parents attened and I made that very clear in the app. Also both of my parents have contributed money yearly because they got so much out of their education at American University. Granted, my stats are not top notch but they should’ve been enough to get me accepted. My parents are disgusted with them.</p>
<p>I think I may appeal, what do you guys think?</p>
<p>Are you saying that you should have been accepted mainly because both of your parents went there? I don't mean to be rude, but I've got to be honest...I've always thought that parents shouldn't be a consideration in the process at ALL. I think only the student should. I know far too many people in my town that get accepted into things solely because of their parents status and contributions to the community...</p>
<p>What were your stats? How were your recs and essays? </p>
<p>I was rejected from some of the colleges I applied to, but accepted into others. It seems to be a bit like a random drawing...some great people are rejected because there are so many equally fantastic people to choose from.</p>
<p>At most colleges, legacy is "considered," not an "important factor." If AU is one of them, you will either get a little more advantage over others or benefit if you are on border line.</p>
<p>I would like you to know that this year admissions process was really unusual at most schools. Note that nearly all top schools receive the highest number of applications this year.</p>
<p>I will admit that its odd that AU rejected you if your parents donate money(I actually think that seems counterproductive). However, if your stats are not good enough to get into AU --- they must be a LOT lower than "top notch". I hope your appeal works out. </p>
<p>-Ryan</p>
<p>Are you saying that you should have been accepted mainly because both of your parents went there? I don't mean to be rude, but I've got to be honest...I've always thought that parents shouldn't be a consideration in the process at ALL.</p>
<p>Nicole... I don't disagree with you, you do bring up a good point... my main point is knowing people have gotten into schools because of legacy and I didn't just leaves an un-settling feeling. If other people can get into schools because of their parents why can't I? </p>
<p>I don't wish to post my stats not because of humiliation but I don't feel it's necessary to do so at this point. What's done is done, all I'm saying is i'm shocked and bummed. But thanks for all your support...i'm off to Quinnipiac next year. </p>
<p>Good luck to everyone else next year.</p>
<p>How much, are your parents donating? Is it an amount that is siginificant enough for some random adcom to care? But it is weird that a legacy applicant, with parents who donate money would get rejected, even though you don't have top notch marks, AU isn't a school that requires top notch marks for admissions.</p>
<p>asap~ i remember we spoke some time ago. i think i remember people gave you some honest feedback, including me, but i think your SATs were the issue. AU, like every other good school has its formula, and cut-offs. "top notch " is a relative description, but in general they want at a minimum, B+ and above GPAs and SATs around 1300, and of course, this all goes up every year. i don't think it's strange that legacy didn't matter all that much, as it's only a limited factor (i think someone said that already.) and i'm glad to see AU has value which is not tied solely to money. but i knew from before you were headed to Quinnipiac, and it'll be great there! very best of luck!</p>
<p>To be honest, I don't think its in AU's interest to be rejecting any donor's child. However, I am glad to see that they are becoming more competitive.</p>
<p>I think that one should not be able to "buy" their way into college! If you want a school to remain competitive, why should the school accept someone with much lower stats than someone who has worked hard to achieve a spot at AU or any other college. You have to work your way to get into a top tier 2 school. No one should pave the way with dollars.</p>
<p>Yeah... if we were Harvard or Yale. The problem is that money is a huge need for our university. They have been trying with limited success to attract outside donors; it doesn't seem logical that they would reject a double legacy considering some of the students that they have let into this place before... I am not pushing for this to be a norm --- but our university needs to find money some way or else they will just continue to jack up tuition and housing costs for the next 3 years and beyond.</p>
<p>Ryan -- asap714 didn't even break a 1200 on his math and english SATs. AU and other Tier II schools are rated as "very difficult." Why would AU accept students at his academic level. It may be for the good of the student as they would be better off in a lower ranking Tier II or Tier III school. All schools increase their tuition by at least 6% each year regardless of outside funding. GW gets huge endowments and their tuition has risen to $60k even though they are on a "fixed" plan and their tuition increases by the same percent for new students. Thank goodness AU is getting more selective. They are in a competitive city and getting more competitive students. I know students who went to AU a few years back and received scholarships and they wouldn't even be considered today. Same with BC and many other colleges. I have friends that say that they wouldn't be able to get into BC now as the bar is being raised each year. Only a few are truly qualified for a Harvard, Yale, etc., and the Tier II level has become extremely competitive and students that cannot meet the standards of Harvard, Yale, work very hard to get into AU, BC and other top notch Tier II schools. Bring on the competition. It only makes for a better school! Again, money can't buy you everything....gotta work hard to get where you want to go.</p>
<p>Connie,
I completely agree with you that its a great thing to increase standards. However, considering there have been other people on this forum who have been accepted with below 1200 SAT's I don't think its too much of a stretch to accept someone if their parents donate a substantial amount of money to the university. Is it a fair practice? No. But until AU proves to the students that they can get more money into this university without necessarily relying on tuition -- I don't think its too much to ask. </p>
<p>I also agree with you that we don't necessarily need any more people with low stats here. However, we also desperately need money.</p>
<p>Ryan - it is hard to compare just on SAT scores. It is the whole package that they look at - GPA, activities, volunteering, essays, etc. Not too many schools, if any, don't increase tuition each year. Endowments and other donations are only one small piece of the pie. Hopefully, things will turn around with the new president. It can only get better as the school becomes more competitive and the money is invested in the right areas. Hopefully, you will be around to see the results of the changes at AU. I wonder what GW is doing with its $60k per student????</p>
<p>I don't think gw's tuition is 60k...</p>
<p>it's not, but it's gettin' pretty damn close</p>
<p>"Again, money can't buy you everything....gotta work hard to get where you want to go".</p>
<p>Connies excuse me but you don't know me and you don't know how hard I work, so please watch what you say on that...I do agree with you in some sense but please dont say "on his acedemic level." Like, you said.. SAT's are just a peice. Just because I didn't break 1200 does not say anything abouy my intelligence, and colleges need to understand that the SAT is complete garbage. It's not even that I'm a bad test taker.. I did very well on state exams for various classes...It's just me and the SAT/ACT don't jive as many other students have the same issue. It's just annoying on my end because I spent a whole year preparing for this test, working my ass off.. taking the test 3 times and it STILL didn't produce the results I needed to.</p>
<p>Also, I don't agree that just because a school is more competitive that it's a better school. It just means its more desireable and more people want to go there. In some situations, yes, it may be a better school but a lot of these schools that people think are amazing is just as good (education wise) as schools that aren't as popular. Many people (myself included) get caught up in the "brand name" such as American and Boston and tend to shove others schools which are less popular aisde.</p>
<p>asap714 - Most high-ranked tier II schools are harder to get into these days. They have up their ante and are looking for the all round student. I understand that you worked hard, but unfortunately, schools such as American, BC, GT, GW, etc. have a lot of applicants and they pick the cream of the crop. I understand your frustration and can only suggest that if you really want to go to any of these colleges, you try to transfer in. I think that will be your best bet. Good luck to you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Many people (myself included) get caught up in the "brand name" such as American and Boston and tend to shove others schools which are less popular aisde.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>how far we have come!</p>
<p>legacy is the dumbest thing ever, unfortunately it works (except in this case)...1200 SAT is something any top 100 college will take as a sign that either the student is not qualified enough or the school he/she went to is not competitive enough. Either way, ur screwed. Go to a decent tier II school and pull off a decent GPA and transfer and really show them, don't complain about how your parents cannot buy you in </p>
<p>another thing, you cannot compare bc and american, the former is a LOT better except for poly sci of course</p>
<p>and brand name is what grad schools and employers care about...so yea, it does matter, not what you believe to be equal education which it very well might be, but who cares?</p>
<p>I was refering to Boston University not Boston College. And thanks Connies, I appreciate your advice. </p>
<p>I'm not complaing that they can't buy me in..I'm complaing that so many other people get admitted based on legacy then I get screwed over with 2 legacies. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying legacy is good and I'm not saying legacy is fair. I'm just in awe with the way admissions are and they are simply a crap shoot these days.</p>