“All the above says is [that] . . . the legacy applicants had a better overall academic profile” (18)
Actually, it was stated that, “By definition” . . . [objective factors] will be lower on average" for (presumably admitted) legacy applicants. (17)
However, I disagree that this is “by definition.” It is more along the lines of “by statistical expectation.”
@jpm50 - “Do you look at an applicant and say: “This person’s parent attended BC. Therefore the chances we will accept this person are now increased.”?”
Yes.
How whiny. Mit has a clear policy, legacy is no help. Bc says legacy helps. But just because your legacy, it isn’t automatic. Why is that hard for you to understand? Bc giving is 34% or something. The frustrated parents are in the 66% group. If my daughter is rejected, I agree, no need to keep donating, and my company match stops, but I won’t blame BC for that. My daughter just wasn’t strong enough. She will go to creighton who has already given a scholarship and has a med school. So it’s all good and I save money.
And. One other thing. I’m sure 100% of rejected legacy students would be accepted into woods college of advancing studies. You get the exact same degree you just don’t get to go during the day.
BC Admissions - thanks for all your input. Certainly understandable you can’t give out details but what you are sharing is appreciated.