Stanford bringing back legacy preference and test required

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of an active alumnus, this is a huge relief. College admissions have become so competitive, it has become almost random. The legacies are every bit as qualified on paper as the other admitted students but they aren't subject to the same RNG in the admissions process.

If they are every bit as qualified then maybe they should just be fine applying without the legacy advantage. The process is should be random for everyone. They have the privilege of having educated parents who give then access to all resources and then they also get an unfair advantage in admissions. Does not seem right at all.

But we don't want to have the same chance of getting in as the non-legacy applicant.
If our kid is just as good as every other kid that gets accepted why shouldn't he have a preference based on the fact that he is much likelier to donate as an adult than a non-legacy admit.
It's not like he is getting a 200 point SAT advantage or a 5 point ACT advantage. He is high stat but because of the incredibly large applicant pool, admissions has become somewhat random and his chances are probably 25% or less but with a legacy preferences it might be 50% or more.

Your privilege is showing. Why do you feel so entitled?

How much have you donate to Stanford?

Too bad your kid can’t get in without a boost.

He can get in but he is at the mercy of the RNG. I like his chances with the legacy preference a lot more. His stats are above the median and he has great extracurriculars but this is 2025 and there is almost no way to get in without a hook and for my kid, legacy was going to be his hook, until newsom banned legacy preferences. I'm glad they're back.

I don't blame you at all- everyone just wishes their high stats kid had a hook that would get them into the real shot rather than the RNG pile. Just keep that in mind and be kind and humble if he gets in . . .

legacy at stanford means nothing unless you have donated significant sums

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of an active alumnus, this is a huge relief. College admissions have become so competitive, it has become almost random. The legacies are every bit as qualified on paper as the other admitted students but they aren't subject to the same RNG in the admissions process.

If they are every bit as qualified then maybe they should just be fine applying without the legacy advantage. The process is should be random for everyone. They have the privilege of having educated parents who give then access to all resources and then they also get an unfair advantage in admissions. Does not seem right at all.

But we don't want to have the same chance of getting in as the non-legacy applicant.
If our kid is just as good as every other kid that gets accepted why shouldn't he have a preference based on the fact that he is much likelier to donate as an adult than a non-legacy admit.
It's not like he is getting a 200 point SAT advantage or a 5 point ACT advantage. He is high stat but because of the incredibly large applicant pool, admissions has become somewhat random and his chances are probably 25% or less but with a legacy preferences it might be 50% or more.

Your privilege is showing. Why do you feel so entitled?

How much have you donate to Stanford?

Too bad your kid can’t get in without a boost.

He can get in but he is at the mercy of the RNG. I like his chances with the legacy preference a lot more. His stats are above the median and he has great extracurriculars but this is 2025 and there is almost no way to get in without a hook and for my kid, legacy was going to be his hook, until newsom banned legacy preferences. I'm glad they're back.

I don't blame you at all- everyone just wishes their high stats kid had a hook that would get them into the real shot rather than the RNG pile. Just keep that in mind and be kind and humble if he gets in . . .

legacy at stanford means nothing unless you have donated significant sums

I didn't know what you meant by significant but the alumni office says "zero dollar requirement" and the common perception is just enough so they keep drowning you in junk mail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The legacy isn't new either- basically they are just turning down State grant funding so they don't have to comply with the California legacy prohibition

Wait until the lawsuit. If diversity can’t be considered neither can legacy preference. That’s not merit.

Some legacy kids pay full cost. I am all for it. It allows other kids from lesser means to get a chance at aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies are only white guys named Chad?

Legacies are dominated by rich white people.

Uh, do you even know what the demographics of Stanford undergraduates have been for the last few decades?

Most of the legacies that I know who have gotten into Stanford in recent years are Asian.

Anecdotal

You would have us think that there aren’t many non-white Stanford alums with kids?

Post a peer-reviewed study if you want to be taken seriously.

Like all the peer-reviewed studies showing that current Stanford legacies are dominated by rich white people?

A peer-reviewed text was posted earlier in the thread. Try to keep up.

It cracks me up that people can't understand why universities are going to start reinstating legacy. We just saw an entire generation get preference for college admission based on race. Now that that first generation is about to have their children apply, right when affirmative action gets abolished, this is how affirmative action carries through to the next generation. It's quite obvious. Legacy should be upheld everywhere.

I went to Stanford in the 90s and knew a lot of first-gen and immigrant nonwhite students. I'm sure other schools were working to bring in those students at the same time. Now that their kids - one generation away from poverty - could benefit from legacy, it's suddenly out of favor and their kids don't get to benefit.

If anything, schools should bring back legacy now, when the legacies aren't all rich white kids (although there were plenty of those, too).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of an active alumnus, this is a huge relief. College admissions have become so competitive, it has become almost random. The legacies are every bit as qualified on paper as the other admitted students but they aren't subject to the same RNG in the admissions process.

If they are every bit as qualified then maybe they should just be fine applying without the legacy advantage. The process is should be random for everyone. They have the privilege of having educated parents who give then access to all resources and then they also get an unfair advantage in admissions. Does not seem right at all.

But we don't want to have the same chance of getting in as the non-legacy applicant.
If our kid is just as good as every other kid that gets accepted why shouldn't he have a preference based on the fact that he is much likelier to donate as an adult than a non-legacy admit.
It's not like he is getting a 200 point SAT advantage or a 5 point ACT advantage. He is high stat but because of the incredibly large applicant pool, admissions has become somewhat random and his chances are probably 25% or less but with a legacy preferences it might be 50% or more.

Your privilege is showing. Why do you feel so entitled?

How much have you donate to Stanford?

Too bad your kid can’t get in without a boost.

He can get in but he is at the mercy of the RNG. I like his chances with the legacy preference a lot more. His stats are above the median and he has great extracurriculars but this is 2025 and there is almost no way to get in without a hook and for my kid, legacy was going to be his hook, until newsom banned legacy preferences. I'm glad they're back.

I don't blame you at all- everyone just wishes their high stats kid had a hook that would get them into the real shot rather than the RNG pile. Just keep that in mind and be kind and humble if he gets in . . .

We understand it's an unearned preference. I think he is as qualified as anyone else that gets in but they reject most of the qualified kids from our school. And yes, I understand that his ability to go to his high school is also unearned.

What it's becoming obvious to everyone is that the disparity we are going to see in society is only going to accelerate (between AI and globalization of talent) and that is causing a lot of anxiety among UMC families that didn't exist when I was a kid.

As an American, I have lived my entire life with an unearned advantage relative to people around the world, add an UMC family background and a good education without debt and I started life on third base. I want the same opportunity for my child and it makes sense for Stanford to give it to him.

The distance between second and third has gotten longer and the distance between third and home has stayed about the same. Silly analogy but IYKYK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common sense is returning.

Nothing common sense about ruining merit so rich kids can go to colleges they already have every advantage getting into. Common sense is banning this stupid policy in the US. Many institutions have dropped this. Stanford only needs to do this because to trump’s “common sense” bull$hit costing them hundreds of millions and his absolute trash economy.

Anyone notice that nobody was going after legacy until the affirmative action preference went away? It was almost as if affirmative action was providing moral cover for legacy preferences.

All of these preferences are bullshit. Sure only the racial preferences are illegal but in just about any asian country you would see rioting if there was a legacy preference. You might as well try to establish an actual aristocracy with noble titles and everything. And I don't think there is another country in the world that has athletic preferences like we do. And donor preferences seems corrupt AF to anyone from any other country. But up until just 5 minutes ago, nobody complained about any of this until the banning of affirmative action suddenly made all the other preferences seem bad.

We don't want to be Asia. America has the best colleges and universities in the world. Go to Asia if you want Asian standards. Nobody will stop you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies are only white guys named Chad?

Legacies are dominated by rich white people.

Uh, do you even know what the demographics of Stanford undergraduates have been for the last few decades?

Most of the legacies that I know who have gotten into Stanford in recent years are Asian.

Anecdotal

You would have us think that there aren’t many non-white Stanford alums with kids?

Post a peer-reviewed study if you want to be taken seriously.

Like all the peer-reviewed studies showing that current Stanford legacies are dominated by rich white people?

A peer-reviewed text was posted earlier in the thread. Try to keep up.

It cracks me up that people can't understand why universities are going to start reinstating legacy. We just saw an entire generation get preference for college admission based on race. Now that that first generation is about to have their children apply, right when affirmative action gets abolished, this is how affirmative action carries through to the next generation. It's quite obvious. Legacy should be upheld everywhere.

Cite that legacy will support affirmative action?

I agree that this thread seems to be jumping the shark….
Um, does the previously poster really think Stanford wants to do this to help black and brown folks? I laughed out loud when I read that.

This whole reaction reinforces my view that many people are just closeted racist. Either blatantly racist, e.g., “the DCA crash was because of DEI. So let’s rid the world of any inclusion initiatives ” Or paternalistic racist, e.g., “there is no way a black or brown kid could actually be _more_ or even the same qualified as my kid.”

I’m so tired of these complaints.

Is that paternalism the reason why they give them preferences because they don't think the black and brown kids can compete with it?

They did it to try to combat entitled people like you

Why only the black and brown kids? Why not the non-privileged white and asian kids?

Non privileged white kids get boosted all the time. One of DS’s friends at duke is a poor white girl who solely got in due to her unique foster story, and now the school pays everything for her and flies her all around. This idea that only black and brown students are poor at ivies is racist.

[Anonymous]

Ironic that as the supreme ct struck down affirmative action (whose goal was to expand access to elite education to new and different kinds of students), that Stanford and others are maintaining "legacy" hook (whose goal is to reduce elite education access to those families already on the inside).

Welp you've shown everyone what you really value, Stanford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of an active alumnus, this is a huge relief. College admissions have become so competitive, it has become almost random. The legacies are every bit as qualified on paper as the other admitted students but they aren't subject to the same RNG in the admissions process.

If they are every bit as qualified then maybe they should just be fine applying without the legacy advantage. The process is should be random for everyone. They have the privilege of having educated parents who give then access to all resources and then they also get an unfair advantage in admissions. Does not seem right at all.

But we don't want to have the same chance of getting in as the non-legacy applicant.
If our kid is just as good as every other kid that gets accepted why shouldn't he have a preference based on the fact that he is much likelier to donate as an adult than a non-legacy admit.
It's not like he is getting a 200 point SAT advantage or a 5 point ACT advantage. He is high stat but because of the incredibly large applicant pool, admissions has become somewhat random and his chances are probably 25% or less but with a legacy preferences it might be 50% or more.

Your privilege is showing. Why do you feel so entitled?

How much have you donate to Stanford?

Too bad your kid can’t get in without a boost.

He can get in but he is at the mercy of the RNG. I like his chances with the legacy preference a lot more. His stats are above the median and he has great extracurriculars but this is 2025 and there is almost no way to get in without a hook and for my kid, legacy was going to be his hook, until newsom banned legacy preferences. I'm glad they're back.

I don't blame you at all- everyone just wishes their high stats kid had a hook that would get them into the real shot rather than the RNG pile. Just keep that in mind and be kind and humble if he gets in . . .

legacy at stanford means nothing unless you have donated significant sums

lol, you’re clueless

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:but the alumni office says "zero dollar requirement"

I have never received anything from the alumni office with those words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies are only white guys named Chad?

Legacies are dominated by rich white people.

Uh, do you even know what the demographics of Stanford undergraduates have been for the last few decades?

Most of the legacies that I know who have gotten into Stanford in recent years are Asian.

Anecdotal

You would have us think that there aren’t many non-white Stanford alums with kids?

Post a peer-reviewed study if you want to be taken seriously.

Like all the peer-reviewed studies showing that current Stanford legacies are dominated by rich white people?

A peer-reviewed text was posted earlier in the thread. Try to keep up.

Yeah, that didn't say anything about the demographics of current legacies. Nice try though.

Read the book, idiot.

So basically you’re full of crap. Show us where it says anything about Stanford legacies or STFU.

You’re too lazy to read a book? STFU and GFY

Source: trust me bro

Source: a peer-reviewed text you’re too lazy to read. You probably can’t handle the truth bro

If it were the truth, you would have shown it already instead of accusing others of laziness.

WTF are you talking about. I cited my source. GFY

Your “source” doesn’t say that current Stanford legacies are dominated by rich white people.

[Anonymous]

Stanford is a private institution that rejects 95% of applicants and probably 80% of those are academically equivalent to each other.
They have to use some criteria to prefer some applicants over others. Legacy is one of those and it has merit. Legacy students are more likely to matriculate, parents likely to stay involved, hire and mentor students, come to events. Every college wants involved alumni- its part of what makes these schools great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:but the alumni office says "zero dollar requirement"

I have never received anything from the alumni office with those words.

Call and ask how much you have to donate to get the legacy preference. The answer is, you have to have a parent that is a graduate. That's it. They might change that but I doubt it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stanford is a private institution that rejects 95% of applicants and probably 80% of those are academically equivalent to each other.
They have to use some criteria to prefer some applicants over others. Legacy is one of those and it has merit. Legacy students are more likely to matriculate, parents likely to stay involved, hire and mentor students, come to events. Every college wants involved alumni- its part of what makes these schools great.

Legacy does not have merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stanford is a private institution that rejects 95% of applicants and probably 80% of those are academically equivalent to each other.
They have to use some criteria to prefer some applicants over others.

1)Legacy is one of those and it has merit.
2)Legacy students are more likely to matriculate,
3)parents likely to stay involved,
4)hire and mentor students,
5)come to events. Every college wants involved alumni- its part of what makes these schools great.

1) legacy is the exact opposite of merit. It is choosing someone based off of their spawn point over their credentials.
2) A non issue for an institution with an 82% yield
3) This wouldn't change if they were just parents who happened to be alumni. Getting rid of legacy doesn't bar your kid from attendance; they just have to earn it. They already are wealthier on average, and the common claim of being a potential donor means they have the economic privilege to get into Stanford without rigging the game
4) Source on legacy parents' propensity to hire and mentor students compared to parents of similar economic status?
5) What kind? Alumni come to the college during alumni weekend, and once again, you don't stop becoming an alum if there's no legacy preference.

Some other notes: Stanford has over 38 billion dollars in its pockets. Institutions of much smaller size have gotten rid of legacy. Being wealthy alone already makes you much more likely to get into an elite school. You don't need any more advantages.
-Alum of a top college that doesn't do legacy and continues to donate and who has a child attending my alma mater.