<p>I'm curious to get the parent point-of-view on this article on how Stanford Admissions is giving a pretty strong boost to applicants from faculty/donor households. </p>
<p>Inside</a> Stanford?s Exclusive Admission Path - Palo Alto, CA Patch</p>
<p>Is this to be expected in all private college admissions or is this an example of unethical cronyism on Stanford's part?</p>
<p>My opinion is a private school admits whoever they want to admit, whether it’s to round out the class, please government regulators, improve their position in rankings, field a strong athletic team, retain valued employees, encourage financial donations, or… whatever strikes their fancy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The two options are not necessarily exclusive, in that some people may answer “both” or “neither”.</p>
<p>I tend to put faculty kids in a different category than donors. I see enrolling and offering tuition discounts to employees more of a job perk than cronyism.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agree fully. Here’s the great thing - if you think that Stanford is compromising its academic standards by admitting presumably or allegedly less qualified students because they are faculty kids and / or kids of major donors … well, then, YOU certainly wouldn’t want to apply to Stanford and run the risk that you’d have to rub elbows with those unqualified folk, would you? It would seem to me that if you really believed this to be a major problem, you’d run like heck from such an inferior experience.</p>
<p>I actually know someone who was a Duke alum, on the board of trustees and a major fundraiser. One of her children went to an LAC for 2 years (not one of the “high” / elite ones) and surprise, surprise, got into Duke as a transfer; the other one went straight to Duke from h.s. But yk something? I don’t have a major problem with it. I’m sure the fundraising she did helped more than enough deserving students go to Duke that it’s a small price to pay. The “unfairness” of these kinds of things would only be horrendous if one could only achieve success at a handful of schools, which of course isn’t true.</p>
<p>Employers offer many perks to attract talented employees. If Stanford wants to admit faculty kids in order to get best professors for its students, it is cost of doing business.</p>
<p>I agree that it’s a small price to pay for good faculty, and the chances are good that the faculty have bright capable kids. As to the donors if their donations enable the school to offer more scholarships or better facilities the school ends up the winner in the long run too.</p>
<p>And as far as I know all private colleges do this.</p>
<p>The article is slightly misleading, not stating anything substantive that I caught. In my experience with another top school, the number of faculty kids applying in a given year is teeny. If they are not in range, they are gently let down. The amount of money you have to give, to sway an admit, is huge and should be over a number of years. And, the number of those discretionary spots, where the Dean can pull in a big donor’s kid (or some other unique case,) is very limited. I’ve seen cases where kids whose parent held longtime major alumni responsibilities got an extra look. And, of course, they like to give a close read to legacies. But, the kids still have to be in range, academically and other.</p>
<p>For some schools, long time involved alum’s kids also get special consideration, it is not always about money.</p>
<p>I agree that it’s a small price to pay for good faculty, and the chances are good that the faculty have bright capable kids. As to the donors if their donations enable the school to offer more scholarships or better facilities the school ends up the winner in the long run too.</p>
<p>I completely agree with this.</p>
<p>My take, this is news? This has been happening since forever around here.</p>
<p>the number of “donors” building a new building on campus so little junior can go to a school is very very very small! it is an imaginary problem that is based on jealousy more than reality! affirmative action admits aka non Asian “diversity” admits are a much larger chuck. if you are Asian applying to an ivy that is where you may hit a wall, not the one student every couple of years who would be a modern day version of the Rockefellers , Vanderbilts or Carnegies!</p>