<p>Let's try to see how far the "legacy" advantage can go with particular schools.</p>
<p>Give the GPA and ACT/SAT scores of legacy applications that were accepted at a particular school.</p>
<p>I'll start - </p>
<p>Friends kid got into Dartmouth (Early Decision) with a 3.7 (UW) and a 29 ACT</p>
<p>Not sure this belongs in the Parent Forum. And, you realize holistic colleges examine more than stats and legacy, right? So, no matter how low some stats are, it’s only a piece of the puzzle, legacy or not. And, misleading.</p>
<p>If you ask most cc parents, they’d tell you that being a legacy counts for very little.</p>
<p>I interviewed for my alma mater.</p>
<p>Legacy counted for very little EXCEPT when coupled with something significant- debuted at Carnegie Hall at age 15, published a novel, etc. In those cases, as long as the grades and scores met a threshold, the kid was likely to be admitted.</p>
<p>To the outside world- that’s an example of Legacy admissions. To those on the inside, that’s the meaning of a hook (Note to the newbies- being a Val is not a hook. Having a 4.0 is not a hook. Taking as many AP’s as you can cram into your schedule is not a hook.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So what? I’m sure that Dartmouth turned down legacies with higher GPAs and ACTs as well. What does that prove? Nothing. </p>
<p>What’s the point – you can’t become a legacy, so why not focus on the things you can control?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe the point is that the OP is trying to find out whether to feel guilty about marrying someone who went to the same college. After all, if you do that, your kids are only legacies at one school. It could have been two. Horrors!</p>
<p>Surely there is, somewhere, a parent who attended an open admission community college who has a child who flunked out of high school (GPA < 1.0 or whatever the flunk out threshold is at the high school) but later wised up and decided to get a new start by attending the same open admission community college for vocational training, associates degree, or preparation to transfer to a four year school to complete a bachelor’s degree.</p>
<p>(Looks like the forum software bug erroneously put this post as #1 in the thread.)</p>
<p>OP, what many don’t understand is that once a certain threshold is obtained, an applicant’s stats in and of themselves are no longer really important. There is nothing really wrong with a 3.7 unweighted; it’s roughly an A- average. Was there a trend in the applicant’s grades, or is the applicant one who is maybe strong in math/science, and not so good in foreign languages? And while a 29 is not a 36, it’s not a horrible score either–it’s probably somewhere around the top 10% if I remember correctly. It’s not like this student is not going to be able to do the work.</p>
<p>So, what else was attractive about the applicant? Have his parents donated
time/money /been active alumni over the years? That can count for a certain amount. All things being roughly equal (ie., an applicant who can do the work), why shouldn’t a school select an applicant who is likely to be able to cope with the academics, be involved on campus during and after student years–and why upset alumni if their child is qualified if the school has that choice? It can’t admit all children of alumni, but it certainly doesn’t want to not admit any children of alumni.</p>
<p>Was the student involved in activities in such a way as to be perceived as an asset on campus? For example, one of my sons had grades and scores about the same as those being discussed here–and he wasn’t overly involved in school stuff because he was extraordinarily involved in a certain leadership EC outside of school–to the point that he became strongly involved on the national and international level. His interpersonal skills (and his interview skills) were off the charts. He got in to a lot of schools we never expected him to–and I think this was the reason why. And yet if you looked at the high school yearbook, and outsiders didn’t know him well outside of school, you’d think he didn’t have any ECs. He didn’t really care about Latin Club or Green Club, etc.</p>
<p>Once a certain academic threshold is reached, I think schools are looking for what makes an applicant different from all the others–what ingredient will an applicant add to the campus stew, as it were, to make it richer and more interesting. As another poster said above, a school isn’t looking for another 4.0 or AP star–it’s looking for a student who can thrive academically AND contribute to campus life.</p>
<p>I knew a guy who failed out of college with a 0.0, all Fs, skipped classes and partied. The academic dismissal rules were that you had to take at least a semester off. When I saw him the next semester at his fraternity, I found out his father was an alum and a major donor; son was allowed “special” projects to make up for missed work. His prior semester’s grades were changed to a 3.5.</p>
<p>Not really an admitted freshman, but a legacy re-admit.</p>
<p>There was one Harvard Summer School classmate from another Ivy who recounted having an obnoxious roommate who bragged about being a legacy admit with a combined post-1995 SAT score barely cracking 1000 whose family supposedly donated several million behind closed doors. He was relieved when his freshman year ended and he no longer had to live with that roommate. </p>
<p>Another account is from an older relative who personally knew a luminary in the modern Chinese literary world. Said luminary’s son ended up getting into an Ivy 30+ years ago because some lit Profs and a Dean were fans of his work. When they heard and confirmed his son was applying, they enthusiastically supported his candidacy and thus, he was admitted despite having what were mediocre HS record/SATs. Unfortunately, that special admission turned out to be a curse as the son was unable to cope with the academic rigor/workload and committed suicide before the end of his first year. </p>
<p>The older relative happened to meet him on the very day he was in the states to wrap up his son’s affairs and to bring him home for a family funeral. Very tragic.</p>
<p>cobrat-
Congrats on your new job.</p>
<p>[Citigroup</a> CEO Pandit and president resign in surprising shake-up; Michael Corbat is new CEO - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/pandit-stepping-down-as-citi-ceo-bank-names-executive-michael-corbat-as-new-chief/2012/10/16/1b51f2d2-178c-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.html]Citigroup”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/pandit-stepping-down-as-citi-ceo-bank-names-executive-michael-corbat-as-new-chief/2012/10/16/1b51f2d2-178c-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.html)</p>
<p>I think they mispelled your name.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Back when my oldest was applying (2007) there were only two green points for Stanford, both well below a sea of red ones. I was told the two were not only legacies, but also recruited athletes, URMs and one was related to a well-known politician. SAT scores around 1300/1600. My son (top 1% of the class, great scores) added to the sea of red. :)</p>
<p>^^Naviance?^^</p>
<p>Yes, Naviance. Quite informative really. Our school had much more normal looking data for the other usual suspects.</p>