<p>Ah. There are so many scams in this college business. Bates had the transparency to allow this reporter to hear and publish this material. Most wouldn't.</p>
<p>I know we've had this debate before, but one or two uber-wealthy legacy kids bring so much money into the school that they are valuable for the other students.</p>
<p>For me, this information says that Bates' education is not that rigorous or "She'll do fine here," would not be true.</p>
<p>And that is valuable information for other students to have making Bates more or less attractive based on the student.</p>
<p>BTW: My kids have need-based scholarships so I am not identifying with this situation at all.</p>
<p>This does, however, really demonstrate why no college is really "need-blind" in admission.</p>
<p>Hold on . . . probably 95% of legacies are not development admits, students from families who have the possibility of making a really meaningful contribution to the college. Adcoms like legacies for other reasons: they will yield in fairly high, predictable numbers; they will be more likely to not transfer and to graduate than the average student; they know the institutional culture and will generally be good fits; they will be more likely to volunteer and be involved both during and after their college years; and their parents are more likely to be part of the active alumni network that gets students placed in jobs and internships. If Bates is typical, they also reject about half of the legacy applications, so this girl was no slouch. If this was among the most inexplicable admissions decisions--and from the context, I think that's a fair inference--then Bates should get high marks, indeed.</p>
<p>Who you know works throughout life. Why be shocked? We all rely on our little circles to get some help when we need it. There are plenty of schools looking for high strivers and grinds. She'll probably marry an Ibanker, help the school with $$ and be a good representative.</p>
<p>Right, an easy yield and full pay to boot....plus mom and dad will owe Bates one down the line. Let's face it, when this admit was made it was not volunteerism or "a good fit" that was going through the minds of the the adcom... It was the Volvo payments and the possibility of buying that water front parcel. Wealthy admits boost salaries. Let's not pretend it had anything to do with this admit contributing to anything but the institutions bottom line.</p>
<p>There is no information in the article indicating she was wealthy. New England has plenty of private schools, some fancy, orhers not. Some kids are attending on full scholarships. Kids earning Bs at some privates with great effort could sleep through classes at some publics & earn As. We just don't know her circumstances. You make a ton of assumptions!</p>
<p>I agree with Marathon that colleges like legacy kids for many, many reasons.</p>
<p>... or she'll become an i-banker herself. Let's stop assuming this girl cannot accomplish anything on her own. Judging from what I have seen at NESCACs and Ivys this is generally true across the board. People believing that academic merits alone are the only factor that matters in admissions to the most selective schools need to do their homework because although academic merits matter, they are only a part of a rather complex equation. I know plenty of straight C-students who now hold Wall St. jobs that some of my 3.5-3.8 GPA friends could only dream of... and why was it they were hired--connections. It's about time to deconstruct the myth of American meritocracy and I am glad this article helped provide nuances often lacking in the general talk between members of the super ambitious and admirable population on CC.</p>
<p>I agree with StickerShock, that you should not assume private school=wealth necessarily. I set up a scholarship at my S school purposely designating it for a need-based (verified) student. It is probable that this kid is not hurting financially, because we hope graduates (legacy) of Bates have been able to be successful financially, but to generalize that this student would not be able to handle the courses at Bates just because she earned B's is rather elitist in that respect, no?</p>
<p>Yeah barrons I should not be so idealistic to be surprised that weathy kids and legacies get fast-tracked past hardworking non-legacy types, but, it is disgusting just the same. To me rejecting a middle class non-legacy with good grades for a wealthy legacy with not so good grades, (or whatever criteria you'd like to use) smacks of intellectual dishonesty. Hat's off to the reporter for mentioning this. I'm sure if Bates had editing rights you never would have read it. For the kids who read the article and may have thought thier hard work, demonstrated interest, and solid interview would be enough to vault them past some lazy kid living on Daddy's dime.. well I guess they'll know better now and as life goes on they'll be less and less surprised, sadly. I've got no dog in this fight mind you but my heart does go out to the kid who got the rejection letter. What would Bates say if he or she REALLY wanted to know why they were not admitted. Would Bates be honest enough to say, "Well, yeah you were qualified... but you see we had this legacy type....." I think not.. more dishonesty. What do you want to bet this legacy admits parent's, standing in line behind a welfare mom with food stamps at the grocery store, would consider those stamps a "hand-out" but ... they have no trouble rationalizing their daughter's wink and a nod acceptance to a top notch LAC, despite her lack of qualifications.</p>
<p>Just to point out - a B average doesn't mean this kid was a complete slacker... it's perfectly respectable to get Bs. There may have been more to her app than this short sentence let us see.</p>
<p>Hey marnik, I'm thinking if daddy Does NOT have a fat checkbook this "B" student with Mickey Mouse courses through her first three years of private school DOES get rejected. That way they can claim they do reject legacies... the not so well off ones.</p>
<p>Nightingale, I think your derision of Bates - based on zero evidence - is both unjustified and uncalled for. Full disclosure: I guess I <em>do</em> have a horse in this race, as Bates opened its arms to my S for his Katrina semester. And I have great respect for the school based on knowing quite a large number of alums and current students, as well as interaction with some faculty.</p>
<p>Based on this sentence
[quote]
solid B student with no rigor until twelfth grade. She's very committed to service [abroad]. And she's a legacy
[/quote]
you come up with "lazy", "underachieving" and start on a rant about Volvo payments and waterfront property. Huh?</p>
<p>Based on the same 17 words, another poster decides that Bates' curriculum must not be rigorous and that other applicants should beware.</p>
<p>Really.</p>
<p>I see totally insufficient evidence to conclude that they gave an unqualified student "a pass.'' She is a solid B student (we have no idea of the degree of grade inflation/deflation at her school). We do know that she did not take the most rigorous courseload until sr. year (a negative aspect for sure) but that she did do so in senior year. We also know that she has shown a commitment to service.</p>
<p>Regardless of whether they gave this student an easier path to admission based on legacy status, I am unaware of ANY college or university in this country that does not do so. </p>
<p>To draw wholesale conclusions about the caliber of education at a school which admits legacies with some degree of boost... is also unjustified and uncalled for.</p>
<p>A little googling turned up some stats that suggest that, in the world of admissions preferences for legacies, Bates is hardly a major offender:</p>
<p>
[quote]
At Bates, as at other selective schools, applicants’ family relationships to Bates are considered — especially in the case of “legacies,” children of alums. Typically, 20 to 25 legacy students enroll each year from an applicant pool of about 50.
<p>The linked article gives more insights into the process at Bates, which really does sound like it's at the extreme end of the holistic admissions spectrum. Interesting points include the crucial importance of the interview and the order in which they arrange items in the dossier, with standardized test scores and grades coming after the application and essay. This is so that the applicant's "self-presentation" isn't framed by knowledge of the numbers. Bates, of course, is one of the few schools in its selectivity range to be SAT-optional.</p>
<p>Between these two articles, I think you get a pretty clear picture of the process.</p>
<p>"We also know that she has shown a commitment to service." - show me an applicant to a top LAC that has not.</p>
<p>The author of the article, who apparently witnessed hundreds of admission decisions, thought the selection was politically motivated. Read the article.</p>
<p>I'm beginning to think "yieldable" plays the big part in Bates' decisions. Re interview S, who was rejected (see my earlier post) did interview at the school; his friend who was accepted and attends did not.</p>
<p>These schools craft PR images like any brand; the truth is often different. That's okay as long as we don't fall for the PR. </p>
<p>As I've said, the fact that the adcom did not think their curriculum to be too challenging for the applier is more d**ning to me than the fact that they admit a less talented legacy over a more talented non-legacy.</p>
<p>However, this is at odds with the egalitarian, abolitionist image they are polishing.</p>
<p>"Regardless of whether they gave this student an easier path to admission based on legacy status, I am unaware of ANY college or university in this country that does not do so." </p>
<p>So I guess it is okay to treat people unfairly, ie., rejecting a qualified kid for a less qualified legacy, as long as you do it on a small scale and announce your intention to do so in advance.</p>
<p>"(we have no idea of the degree of grade inflation/deflation at her school)." </p>
<p>Grade inflation/deflation... give me a break. Who is drawing "wholesale" conclusions now by inferring a "B" student with no rigor at a private school might well be an "A" student at a public high school. </p>
<p>And why no SATS? Maybe because SAT scores may have been the dealbreaker for pulling up legacies... but with no SATS.. reach way, way, down.</p>
<p>Let's just agree that unqualified legacy types do exist to the deteriment of qualified kids and although the situation is unfair many will find ways to rationalize this behavior, especially the parent's of lesser achieving legacies, under the banner that "life is unfair"</p>
<p>jjmom: Your point is well taken. I posted, somehow missing your post. I am judging a bit by personal knowledge, which isn't fair. There does seem to be a fair amount of grade inflation there which I know independent of this article, so you are certainly right.</p>
<p>FWIW: Both my kids' LAC's polish images that I don't find substantiated either. Because this thread was here, I guess I jumped on Bates.</p>
<p>My bad.</p>
<p>I'm happy Bates welcomed your son, and you obviously have more knowledge than I do.</p>
<p>Nightingale, I don't see anything unfair in this at all. This issue has been "debated" ad infinitum. Colleges have many elements to consider when they put together a class. An A student is not necessarily more qualified than a B student for a given college putting together a given class in a given year.</p>
<p>Me? I don't feel comfortable drawing global conclusions about any college based on one short paragraph in one article by one journalist. Nor based on an entire single article by one journalist (I thought this was a good article, btw; just not for the purposes to which you are twisting it, imo).</p>
<p>Clearly you have an axe to grind with Bates. Your privilege. I feel confident that any readers of this thread, who have an interest in Bates as well as an open mind, will consider the source and will not be influenced by your odd perspective.</p>
<p>Different schools have different prefs. If you are kinda smart and run a 4.3 forty there are a whole bunch of schools that might welcome you with open arms that otherwise would not give you a second look. You really did nothing but be born fast which is not all that different from being born a legacy. Just a gift in life's lottery.</p>