<p>Quote from the article According to the charge for the Faculty Senates Committee on Undergraduate Admission and Financial Aid (C-UAFA), the Committee has the power to determine the general criteria under which applicants may be given special consideration because of distinctive characteristics. The charge lists examples of these characteristics, including applicants whose parents graduated from Stanford or are on the Stanford faculty or staff, those with highly developed specific talents, members of ethnic minorities, or others who lend a desirable diversity to the class."</p>
<p>I don’t know why you think this is unique. Almost every single one of Stanford’s peer schools does the same thing. Most admit it as well - take a look at the common data sets. Race and legacy status are almost always considered (the only notable exceptions: Caltech does not consider race and MIT does not consider legacy). </p>
<p>As far as “highly developed specific talents,” this is not preferential treatment in the least. This isn’t something given to someone via their genetics or their parents’ college degree. </p>
<p>I fail to see anything noteworthy about this statement.</p>
<p>Well, based on what I know, Caltech does care for minorities, although their approach is somewhat different from MIT’s. It seems that MIT lowers standards for minority applicants while Caltech invests more in recruiting top ones (e.g., flying them in for prefrosh weekend). As far as I remember, MIT asked questions about relations with MIT on their application. I don’t know how much it counts.
Regarding Stanford preferential admission, I don’t doubt it. However, my son who doesn’t have any of the typical hooks, has no relation to Stanford, and didn’t even visit it (the only college he didn’t visit before applying), has a likely letter and a travel grant to visit in April. Academically, he is well above most of his peers and has a few interests and leadership roles that, it seems, Stanford thought fitting. The same kid was wait-listed by MIT, while a seemingly less qualified girl from his school was admitted.</p>
<p>Just to reiterate what everyone else said: this is definitely not unique to Stanford. Virtually all of the most selective schools adopt similar policies.</p>
<p>MIT’s explanation for asking about legacy is that they like to tell their alumni office so that parents with kids who were recently rejected are not immediately asked for donations. I think they like to give a grace period rather than rubbing it in, so to speak.</p>
<p>As far as Caltech goes, I just glanced at their common data set and it seems they do consider race. Interesting, as I’d read before that they don’t.</p>
<p>Anyway, I think something to take away from this is that there will always be spaces reserved for legacies, URMs, whatever. As a non-hooked applicant, you are not competing with these people. If you’re an asian male, you are competing with other asian males. If you are from an underrepresented geographical area, you are competing with the people from your area. If you are a legacy, you are competing with other legacies. People aren’t rejected “because” of the legacy or URM that gains admission.</p>
<p>Yes, it is a well know practice at many of the colleges. What struck me is that Stanford is openly acknowledging and defending the practice. I commend them for their honesty !.</p>
<p>Most colleges publish their legacy admit numbers. So they are considerably more open than Stanford.</p>
<p>There is race affirmative action at all of the top colleges. The reason Caltech looks like they dont is because admitted students don’t always show up. Someone admitted to Caltech based on race will usually have a profile worthy of other top schools which offer lot more choices in majors than Caltech.</p>
<p>Can’t speak for all, but the minority student from my town who was admitted to both MIT and Caltech last year chose the latter. I don’t know why, but I know he was flown in for the prefrosh weekend at Caltech’s expense. What’s funny is that he didn’t even realize it was a special treatment and assumed Caltech pays all admitted students to visit! That’s what he told his friends who were admitted EA this year :)</p>
<p>Next time someone wants to complain about URM’s getting preferential treatment consider that legacies, donation students and faculty connections are not likely to be a minority students.</p>
<p>For decades (centuries in some cases), the wealthy, well-connected, and otherwise-privileged have had preferential treatment in college admissions (and just about everything else). I think its outrageous to see some of the comments on various Ivy and top university/LAC threads about the “minorities getting preferential treatment.” If you can’t understand why the schools (about 30 of them) filed amicus briefs in the Supreme Court case on admissions, you don’t belong at any of those schools. The lady doth protest too much!</p>