Yale Admissions

[Anonymous]

DCUM honestly needs to have one master thread related to Ivy‘s, and them trying to sneak URM in (or worse the black people trying to trick the Supreme Court by writing their essay in AAVE), even though these schools don’t have more than 8% Black students.

We exhaust the same conversations and flawed arguments. it seems like I already read this thread and I see that it was just started yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got into Yale in 2015 (so perhaps very slightly less competitive than it is today, but in practice I don't think there's a big difference) with "no hooks". I just went to a normal DCPS high school and got good grades...

Dramatically less competitive than today, unfortunately.

Yale grad here.... I don't think the regular legacies get much of a bump. My guess is that they just take a slightly closer look at legacies and they are a little less likely to get lost in the pile. But I really don't know. All I know is alums are always posting in the alum group about their legacy kids not getting in.
Now, maybe the children of big donors get a bump....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got into Yale in 2015 (so perhaps very slightly less competitive than it is today, but in practice I don't think there's a big difference) with "no hooks". I just went to a normal DCPS high school and got good grades...

Dramatically less competitive than today, unfortunately.

Yale grad here.... I don't think the regular legacies get much of a bump. My guess is that they just take a slightly closer look at legacies and they are a little less likely to get lost in the pile. But I really don't know. All I know is alums are always posting in the alum group about their legacy kids not getting in.
Now, maybe the children of big donors get a bump....

Legacy + Big Donor is a huge bump for sure

[Anonymous]

They should just increase the number of seats. let go of the residential college for those willing to attend without RC. Plenty of room in most classrooms.

[Anonymous]

Send your child to Exeter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a kid who got in who is none of those things. He is finishing up his first semester at Yale right now. He's Asian, too! I don't know his stats as he is a friend, but from what I know he had outstanding academics, national math and science competitions, top musician, etc. It does happen.

It’s 2023 post affirmative action. If your kid didn’t get in, then it has nothing to do with his/her hook so please stop including URM as a reason. They just didn’t make the cut.

The quoted post is the only answer I will accept now because the old excuses no longer work and now your child will be judged negatively the same way my child was judged. How does it feel?

-URM Mother of an Ivy student who is obviously not surprised the same blame and excuses are still being used.

you are mistaken. URM and first-generation (greatest percentage of First gen are URMs) is still very much alive. C.J. Roberts said in the opinion that the discussion of import of race in the applicant's life just moves to the essays. American colleges are going to continue to engage in social engineering even if they have to hire more readers to figure out who is whom without a box.

No you are mistaken.

I just sat through a webinar with a Civil Rights lawyer at a government agency and this person emphasized that schools using essays to identify students who have good “character” and who have had to overcome hardships will be acceptable. To the extent race contributed to an experienced hardship, then it may be discussed in the essay but universities do not have control over that. There is no longer a legal reason for universities to use race alone (with all other scores/grades being equal) to give anyone a boost over another applicant. So a student can mention race in their essay but it will not give an applicant a boost.

Having said that, please provide facts to support your assertion that most first generation students (specifically at top 20 schools) are URM. If so, I would bet most of the first generation students at top schools are definitely not African Americans. I understand why lumping URM as a hook with first generation makes you feel better about shifting blame once again to these students but it comes across loud and clear as a dog whistle. Now it’s “These first generation (URM by proxy) students took my child’s spot”.

High SAT scoring college applicants who are the children of my highly educated peers (and arguably privileged) did not waltz into any top 20 school. Plenty received Ivy rejections and were put on waitlists just like any other kid. In fact, many of these kids are attending UVA or Georgia Tech and are highly qualified.

I have a family member who works at a T10 and another on the board of trustees at a T25. Both sent internal emails post SC decision reaffirming their commitment to diversity. URM will continue to be a hook, and the admissions record will NEVER have anything in it to justify a challenge on affirmative action grounds. It’s incredibly naive to expect otherwise.

Are you an expert with a PhD in this subject? Why should I believe you? Because you said it is so and added a condescending and flippant “incredibly naive” remark? I would love if those mythical emails surfaced. A university’s commitment to diversity does not equate to URM being a hook. I clearly gave examples demonstrating that it wasn’t for all qualified URM. Least you forget, affirmative action helped generations of women in the name of diversity. It’s just speculation on your part regarding what admissions committees will do.

I get it. Despite your best efforts, your kids still won’t get in so you need to protect your ego and come up with new reasons to justify why. Tough cookies. I would focus my energy on getting my own children up to par to compete and save that blame for legacy admits now that affirmative action was successfully challenged. Leave URM out of it.

- An expert with a PhD ; -)

Mythical emails? What? Most universities have sent these out after the Supreme Court ruling. As have high schools indicating their intention to "advocate" particularly for URM candidates. Nothing mythical about this

Is that legal? Shouldn’t they advocate for all students?

[Anonymous]

Yale is far less attractive after what came out on Capitol Hill about the Ivies last week.

[Anonymous]

I’d wager these schools could triple in size and make no dent in the anger. The problem is they are too small to make a dent from a national perspective. They aren’t going to magically turn into UCLA. I believe a lot of this anger reflects the diminishment of our state school system, which is big enough to actually make a difference but has been starved for resources. And now these small schools are somehow supposed to make it up for everybody.

Imagine if the flagship in each state was tuition free. Now that would move the needle.

Re: government funding. That’s for research that is intended to cure cancer and the like. Do we not want to cure cancer anymore?

My child is there now - no hooks, overrepresented ethnicity, overrepresented area, a lot of national recognition in one subject (which included something the school wanted). Became obsessed with subject in 8th grade. She got LUCKY — the school happened to want that skill that year. It isn’t a merit game, and the misunderstanding that it is creates incredible amounts of resentment.

And yes — she is a rarity where we live. The legacy parent whose child didn’t get in is right - Yale and Princeton have recently not given any nods to standard legacies at all from areas like ours and backgrounds like ours. Kids like ours have been pushed aside in the quest for diversity of all types. And our kids will be completely fine regardless.

There was and is nothing wrong or worse about the kids who don’t get in. The more we really get that, the better we will all feel about all of this. I would caution applicants that if you are from an overrepresented area, you have little shot unless you offer something specific the school wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d wager these schools could triple in size and make no dent in the anger. The problem is they are too small to make a dent from a national perspective. They aren’t going to magically turn into UCLA. I believe a lot of this anger reflects the diminishment of our state school system, which is big enough to actually make a difference but has been starved for resources. And now these small schools are somehow supposed to make it up for everybody.

Imagine if the flagship in each state was tuition free. Now that would move the needle.

Re: government funding. That’s for research that is intended to cure cancer and the like. Do we not want to cure cancer anymore?

My child is there now - no hooks, overrepresented ethnicity, overrepresented area, a lot of national recognition in one subject (which included something the school wanted). Became obsessed with subject in 8th grade. She got LUCKY — the school happened to want that skill that year. It isn’t a merit game, and the misunderstanding that it is creates incredible amounts of resentment.

And yes — she is a rarity where we live. The legacy parent whose child didn’t get in is right - Yale and Princeton have recently not given any nods to standard legacies at all from areas like ours and backgrounds like ours. Kids like ours have been pushed aside in the quest for diversity of all types. And our kids will be completely fine regardless.

There was and is nothing wrong or worse about the kids who don’t get in. The more we really get that, the better we will all feel about all of this. I would caution applicants that if you are from an overrepresented area, you have little shot unless you offer something specific the school wants.

The continued preference for legacies (including --to your point -- in the DMV area) is among the factors that many find extremely frustrating. Without a doubt, this is what one can see in the admission outcomes in the last few years. Legacies with lower stats etc preferred over non-leagcies. How can this be seen as fair? How is this not frustrating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than Legacy/Athlete/URM - any DMV admits at all? Looking at our school, this seems to take up 100 percent of the cases.

Yes, there is little room for kids admitted solely on merit these days.

NP. Junior mom. A little shocked to see the assertions on this thread. What an awful situation for our top universities to be driven by legacy considerations. Even the UK with its traditions of royalty does not permit this.

Virtually all the legacies I know getting admitted are highly qualified. I'd be much more concerned about the famous/influential people's kids or the 1st gens/URMs.

If highly qualified, they should compete EQUALLY against non legacies. Tons of people are qualified. To edge out others on the basis of legacy is the problem.

Legacy is at best a tie breaker these days.

And rarely even that, unless a big donor well-connected family. I only know one super-high-achieving legacy kid admitted in my cohort. I know of at least 60 high-achieving kids who were either rejected, or deferred then rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d wager these schools could triple in size and make no dent in the anger. The problem is they are too small to make a dent from a national perspective. They aren’t going to magically turn into UCLA. I believe a lot of this anger reflects the diminishment of our state school system, which is big enough to actually make a difference but has been starved for resources. And now these small schools are somehow supposed to make it up for everybody.

Imagine if the flagship in each state was tuition free. Now that would move the needle.

Re: government funding. That’s for research that is intended to cure cancer and the like. Do we not want to cure cancer anymore?

My child is there now - no hooks, overrepresented ethnicity, overrepresented area, a lot of national recognition in one subject (which included something the school wanted). Became obsessed with subject in 8th grade. She got LUCKY — the school happened to want that skill that year. It isn’t a merit game, and the misunderstanding that it is creates incredible amounts of resentment.

And yes — she is a rarity where we live. The legacy parent whose child didn’t get in is right - Yale and Princeton have recently not given any nods to standard legacies at all from areas like ours and backgrounds like ours. Kids like ours have been pushed aside in the quest for diversity of all types. And our kids will be completely fine regardless.

There was and is nothing wrong or worse about the kids who don’t get in. The more we really get that, the better we will all feel about all of this. I would caution applicants that if you are from an overrepresented area, you have little shot unless you offer something specific the school wants.

The continued preference for legacies (including --to your point -- in the DMV area) is among the factors that many find extremely frustrating. Without a doubt, this is what one can see in the admission outcomes in the last few years. Legacies with lower stats etc preferred over non-leagcies. How can this be seen as fair? How is this not frustrating?

To me the ones who should be the most frustrated are the families with extremely strong legacies who wasted their early shot and as such had a miserable long season. I know numerous legacies attending different Ivies they got into RD. For everyone else with highly talented kids, the odds of any of them getting in unhooked remains vanishingly low regardless whether there is a legacy bucket or not.

[Anonymous]

If the stats are significantly lower, then it was probably not about the legacy anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or send your kids to a New England boarding school.

Yes, no Yale legacies, athletes, URMs, or First Gens at New England boarding schools or anywhere else in the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than Legacy/Athlete/URM - any DMV admits at all? Looking at our school, this seems to take up 100 percent of the cases.

Yes, there is little room for kids admitted solely on merit these days.

NP. Junior mom. A little shocked to see the assertions on this thread. What an awful situation for our top universities to be driven by legacy considerations. Even the UK with its traditions of royalty does not permit this.

Virtually all the legacies I know getting admitted are highly qualified. I'd be much more concerned about the famous/influential people's kids or the 1st gens/URMs.

If highly qualified, they should compete EQUALLY against non legacies. Tons of people are qualified. To edge out others on the basis of legacy is the problem.

Legacy is at best a tie breaker these days.

And rarely even that, unless a big donor well-connected family. I only know one super-high-achieving legacy kid admitted in my cohort. I know of at least 60 high-achieving kids who were either rejected, or deferred then rejected.

On average legacy admits have higher GPAs than non-legacy admits. It gets you a closer read but it’s not going to get you in if you don’t compare favorably against your peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d wager these schools could triple in size and make no dent in the anger. The problem is they are too small to make a dent from a national perspective. They aren’t going to magically turn into UCLA. I believe a lot of this anger reflects the diminishment of our state school system, which is big enough to actually make a difference but has been starved for resources. And now these small schools are somehow supposed to make it up for everybody.

Imagine if the flagship in each state was tuition free. Now that would move the needle.

Re: government funding. That’s for research that is intended to cure cancer and the like. Do we not want to cure cancer anymore?

My child is there now - no hooks, overrepresented ethnicity, overrepresented area, a lot of national recognition in one subject (which included something the school wanted). Became obsessed with subject in 8th grade. She got LUCKY — the school happened to want that skill that year. It isn’t a merit game, and the misunderstanding that it is creates incredible amounts of resentment.

And yes — she is a rarity where we live. The legacy parent whose child didn’t get in is right - Yale and Princeton have recently not given any nods to standard legacies at all from areas like ours and backgrounds like ours. Kids like ours have been pushed aside in the quest for diversity of all types. And our kids will be completely fine regardless.

There was and is nothing wrong or worse about the kids who don’t get in. The more we really get that, the better we will all feel about all of this. I would caution applicants that if you are from an overrepresented area, you have little shot unless you offer something specific the school wants.

Well said.