<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, it does. The influence of legacy credentials on a college application is primarily dependent on the extent of the legacy (a “double legacy” (both parents attended) is far more valuable than a sibling legacy, for instance).</p>
<p>lol i got waitlisted by stanford =(
i hope princeton isnt a long shot</p>
<p>ahahahahaha. So, if I want to give my kids an advantage instead of having them work for it, I should find my husband at Princeton, have us both go to Harvard for grad school, then move to Alaska. Or North Dakota, Montana, South Dakota, etc. OH better yet, find a Native American, black, or HIspanic man at Princeton. Why don’t you just let them be? I don’t want my kids to depend on me, I want them to make it on their own.</p>
<p>^
i might just do that for my future kids… haha</p>
<p>You guys are making it sound like getting into Stanford gives one a WORSE chance of getting into HYP.
):
I’ve gotten into Stanford and Chicago. Rejected from MIT. Can this bode BADLY for HYP? I mean, if their admissions processes are so different…</p>
<p>Ela, it’s not that their “admissions processes” are VERY different.
Anybody who was competitive enough to get into Stanford and U of Chicago is in fact a VERY competitive applicant for HYP.
They don’t have to look at the same things, but they’re both “Colleges” after all 
A strong applicant is a strong applicant for any college :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know what they have said. But because being a legacy involves more than having parents who attended the school, the statistic isn’t telling enough – perhaps there were 40% of legacies who were just as competitive as the rest of the pool, which would make the legacy totally irrelevant. As I said before, being a legacy generally means your application is stronger even if you ignore the legacy part completely.</p>
<p>I got rejected from Stanford, but it means nothing. It’s a total crapshoot.</p>
<p>Baelor-
what you’re saying about stanford admissions is a little confusing to me. the 40% of students hailing from CA is because a significantly larger portion of applicants are from Cali (as compared to HYP). They don’t favor CA students, the admit rate for them is nearly the same as “most” other states.</p>
<p>Also, these are the SAT scores from ivys/stanford (this data is a little old, couldn’t find the new ones)
- Harvard 2194
- Princeton 2172
- Yale 2150
- Stanford 2170</p>
<p>Stanford’s right in the middle on the test scores. Maybe they just aren’t sticklers on the GPA.</p>
<p>I had 2260 SAT and 34 ACT (good, but not great). With a 3.5 GPA , I got deferred REA at Stanford. I just heard back on Friday that I got in RD.</p>
<p>I got in because of who I am in the non-academic world. Stanford wants kids who will contribute and add to the atmosphere on campus. They aim to appeal to smart kids who also are gonna spend a lot of time out and about on campus, not just hunched over a book in the library. It was my absurd amount of leadership and legitimate ec’s that got me in. (i also had a significant upward grade trend)</p>
<p>Whether it was smart or not, I put involvement on my campus right next to (and sometimes in front of) academics. Stanford saw this…and must’ve liked it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This data is terribly inaccurate. If we examine the middle halves of the student bodies, we’ll see:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stanford is lacking a noticeable 60 points or so in SATs compared to HYP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t flatter yourself.</p>
<p>This thread makes me less optimistic. All this talk of no correlation between HYP and Stanford acceptance makes me doubt myself. I was accepted to Stanford, and now I’m convinced there’s no way I’ll get accepted to Princeton.</p>
<p>Hahah I think we all need to go outside and relax. :)</p>
<p>^^^^ Don’t worry too much. Though there is definitely some truth in their statements, I think the main idea is to give hope to the Stanford rejects (like me). In all cases, these schools are a crap shoot, but if you got into Stanford you’re obviously an impressive applicant.</p>
<p>Congrats for getting into my dream school!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course. But given that the applicant pools are vastly different, it is impossible to use the same criteria to judge them.</p>
<p>And if Stanford wanted (and if HYP wanted), they could take all Californians – or no Californians). The selection processes are different in part because of different applicant pools.</p>
<p>But the huge Californian presence is but a facet of the admissions process. Stanford’s application reveals its different focus – consider its supplemental essays in comparison to Princeton’s.</p>
<p>Omega, “Don’t flatter yourself” I COMPLETELY agree.</p>
<p>also, from my sleuthing skills, I see that stanford must have overlooked the obvious reasons for which you were granted admission the first time you applied…</p>
<p>i got rejected by MIT/Stanford/Caltech but i got a likely from Cornell. but im still hoping for princeton :(</p>
<p>^ For me, it’s rejections from MIT, Stanford, Chicago, and Amherst, and waitlist from Duke. Likely from Cornell CAS.</p>
<p>Why do so many people get likely letters? I thought only urms and athletes got them? Or am I just screwed:p</p>
<p>^^^ you’re just screwed.</p>
<p>lol jk jk. no some people got likely letters. i got an acceptance b/c i applied to cals.</p>
<p>I got a likely from cornell as a girl in engineering, as did numerous other girls (according to cc threads) who applied into engineering majors.
i also got into duke.
but still…less than 2 days…</p>