<p>Well I've heard that Stanford is big on legacies, especially for early action.</p>
<p>Unlike other schools, Stanford considers parents who attended grad school as legacies as well.</p>
<p>So my question is: What exactly is a legacy?
Obviously, if your mom or dad went, you're a legacy.</p>
<p>But what about a GRANDPARENT?
a STEP-PARENT?
a SIBLING?</p>
<p>And even if these aren't legacies in the traditional sense, suppose 2 applicants w/ equal qualifications were compared. One has a "step-parent legacy"; the other doesn't. Would the first student have the advantage because he/she is more closely affiliated with Stanford?</p>
<p>this is how they are listed on the application (check all that apply):
Father/Step-Father Undergraduate
Mother/Step-Mother Undergraduate
Father/Step-Father Graduate
Mother/Step-Mother Graduate
Grandparent Stanford degree
Great Grandparent Stanford degree
Other Relative Stanford degree
Parent/Step-Parent employed
Sibling attends/attended Undergraduate</p>
<p>You then list the names, relationship, year of graduation, and degree</p>
<p>obviously they all have different amount of significance
but remember that there are also disadvantages to being a legacy</p>
<p>just the fact that you are associated with university isnt the only reason that colleges like legacies</p>
<p>with the title of legacy, it is assumed that you have had the advantage of coming from an educated family with more opportunities available to you than, say, a family where the parents have not attended college. if you have taken advantage of that by excelling in whatever it is that you do, then it will be favorable. if you have not, its obviously not going to look good. did that explanation make sense? i can clarify if it didnât (i donât mean it sarcastically. i really sometimes donât know if people follow what i say)</p>
<p>if they are legally your grandparents (meaning ur step-parent is legally your parent), then i would think that you can just list them under grandparent.
however, this is something you should ask stanford admissions</p>
<p>If youâre a legacy, there really arenât disadvantages other than the school might expect a little bit more from you since your family are successful Stanford grads.</p>
<p>Legacy really depends on the school. From what i have den the past few years, itâs really not a noticeable advantage at Stanford but itâs really hard to tellâŠ</p>
<p>Legacy really isnât a âhugeâ boost, unless your parents are multi-millionaire donors.</p>
<p>IMO, these are the hooks in order of significance:</p>
<ol>
<li>Development Case (Parents donate huge amounts of $)</li>
<li>Athletic Recruit</li>
<li>URM</li>
<li>Legacy</li>
<li>First Generation College Student</li>
</ol>
<p>Being a legacy is a boost, but as NJDS said, the bar is set higher for legacies from the beginning. One would still have to be an outstanding applicant to be accepted as a legacy, although a little less outstanding than non-legacy, unhooked applicants.</p>
<p>Just thought Iâd weight in on legacies at Stanford. Iâm entering as a freshman this year, and Iâm a legacy (my mom went to undergrad). I applied early because it was my first choice. I got deferred early, and then accepted regular. When I got the deferral, I basically thought that they were just going to reject or waitlist me because I had heard that Stanford does that to a lot of legacy admits who apply early because they want to, if possible, keep the connections with the parent alum. </p>
<p>When I applied, we got a letter home saying that about 16% of legacies are admitted. Itâs definitely a bump up from 7.3%, but obviously could have to do with a fair amount of self-selection (and itâs nothing compared to, say, Princetonâs 40% legacy admit rate). </p>
<p>But so basically, it helps, but itâs not a huge help. And donât give up hope if youâre a deferred legacy, because they arenât necessarily just going to reject or waitlist you later. (Iâm living proof, I suppose)</p>
<p>^Ditto to everything you said, literally I went through the same things and had the same thoughts. Except my dad was the alum. </p>
<p>After looking through the stats for accepted students page, legacies could get away with a bit lower GPAs (although this may have been the fact that many were at very competitive high schools due to their parent(s)). They generally had similar test scores to admitted students. So academically they are quite able to succeed, and the legacies I knew first year were very strong academically. I think their EC profile fits that of a lot of unhooked applicants, though they can probably get away with worse. </p>
<p>I think that where legacy helps is that it takes a lot of the seemingly random admissions decisions out of things. Tons of very strong unhooked applicants get rejected. But if youâre a strong legacy applicant, you have very good chances. 7 to 16 percent doesnât seem like much if youâre one of the worst students in the applicant pool. But if youâre somewhere in the top 30 percent in the applicant pool, your chances go from like 20% to 55%. If youâre in the top 15 percent of the applicant pool, your chances go from like 45% to 100%. Thatâs a pretty significant difference. I probably screwed up on some of my probability calculations, but you hopefully get the point. Your chances go up a lot, if youâre at the level of student Stanford looks for. </p>
<p>And just cause you have a 4.0 and 2300 or whatever and are a legacy doesnât guarantee anything- Iâve heard of Stanford rejecting legacies with those stats.</p>
<p>Thank you all so much, this information is very helpful!
Unfortunately I donât have amazing stats, mainly test-score-wise (29 on ACT, but retaking). And a ~4.2 GPA, but at a college prep school and will have taken 24 semesters of honors/AP classes by the end of senior year.
Additionally, I also wonder how much of an edge big donor legacies actually haveâŠ</p>
<p>hey guys, i was wondering⊠what times do stanford cross country/ track and field recruits have? i looked up the times for the students already running for stanford, but idk what time i need to be recruited (even if i apply to be a recruit :P)</p>
<ol>
<li>there is no ED</li>
<li>technically, but it arguably has little impact in either. it is much more likely simply a coincidence that most legacies apply REA because of affiliation and hope of an admission boost.</li>
</ol>
<p>My son and I attended their Info Session - a specific question came up about legacies and whether folks who were not legacies were at a disadvantage or not. For what itâs worth hereâs what they stated :
Legacy considerations are a âtipping factorâ at best when all else is equal ( between applicants).
Legacy considerations can âNEVERâ make up for lack of credentials / qualifications ( i.e. poorer GPA, scores, ECs etc.)</p>
<p>Legacy status, in and of itself, does not matter even if your credentials and qualifications would put you in the top 25% of the Stanford class- still need another hook- either a ânon-trivialâ financial contribution to the school (> 1 million dollars: this directly from the mouth of a former dean of admissions), a recruited athlete, URM, celebrity, etc. This is not true at all schools, however, e.g. Princeton highly values legacy applicants.</p>