How to respond when kid gets into school and is Legacy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just smile and say nothing. Don’t say a word. The silence will make the person realize it was a rude comment. Likely a true comment, but still inappropriate. Sort of like commenting on weight loss or weight gain. True, but inappropriate.

People who get called out on the truth like to fall back on vague claims that something is "rude" or "inappropriate." It's not. It's just the truth.

The truth is they worked really hard in a number of areas and also had the benefit of legacy. Identifying legacy singularly comes off as sour grapes and should be treated as such. People aren’t robots, and having privilege doesn’t mean people have to deal with comments designed to hurt. In your internet world it might be “truth” but in the real world, it’s just being a dick. It’s an important lesson to learn that people can and will be offended by these comments so don’t be surprised.

This, thank you - again, these are just kids. Are they supposed to choose the non-legacy school over the legacy school to get rejected and prove a point to the jerks in their "community"? No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is all a subset of American society as a whole. The privileged like to believe that they are the beneficiaries of hard work, when in reality they were born on second or third base into a system that benefits them. They argue that others simply have to work harder to have what they have. Look at the PP attacking other parents for not striving hard in high school to give their own kids legacy preference. But the systems are rigged. It's not a meritocracy. The privileged recognize this privately but don't like it spoken aloud, and they certainly do not like having it pointed out by someone who is not benefitting from the rigged systems. That person is brushed off as a "sore loser" or "rude."

The college admissions process is often the first time that many kids realize that it's not all about merit (and arguably, there is a certain privilege in this being the first dose of reality for those kids). So yeah, some of them are going to be upset and say the quiet part out loud.

The bolded is precisely what is going on in this thread from the legacy parents, including OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just smile and say nothing. Don’t say a word. The silence will make the person realize it was a rude comment. Likely a true comment, but still inappropriate. Sort of like commenting on weight loss or weight gain. True, but inappropriate.

People who get called out on the truth like to fall back on vague claims that something is "rude" or "inappropriate." It's not. It's just the truth.

The truth is they worked really hard in a number of areas and also had the benefit of legacy. Identifying legacy singularly comes off as sour grapes and should be treated as such. People aren’t robots, and having privilege doesn’t mean people have to deal with comments designed to hurt. In your internet world it might be “truth” but in the real world, it’s just being a dick. It’s an important lesson to learn that people can and will be offended by these comments so don’t be surprised.

This, thank you - again, these are just kids. Are they supposed to choose the non-legacy school over the legacy school to get rejected and prove a point to the jerks in their "community"? No thanks.

Of course not…but it is NOT mean when others say the truth aloud. You’re admitting if the same
Kid applied unhooked elsewhere, the chance of admission goes way down. Another kid saying what was already acknowledged privately in your family AND stating the truth isn’t mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are we protecting here? Sounds like it’s the kid who thought they had a competitive application but didn’t get admitted to an elite school. So, OP’s kid has to console them by suggesting that legacy tipped the scales for him? Wouldn’t that make the fragile kids even more resentful? I guess it’s a cope to “blame”the legacy parents. So stupid.

This. If they’re friends, call them on their BS. A friend would be happy for you and even if they made a snide remark because of jealousy, they would know it if you called them on it. Don’t apologize for success to this passive aggressive nonsense.

Since when is being aware of reality passive aggressive? It is not passive aggressive to recognize the reality of legacy preferences. It is simply fact.

Honestly I sometimes think legacy preference should go away only because the people who want it are so insufferable. You cannot demand that everyone pretend legacies don’t have an enormous advantage in admissions when there is so much hard data showing just how much advantage they get. You people sound like you would demand everyone in the world pretend the sky isn’t blue if understanding the sky is in fact blue would hurt your child’s feelings.

Is it necessary to qualify it to a friends face. Assuming it’s factually the only reason, what’s the purpose of “you only got in cause your parents went there?”

Facing reality? Why is acknowledging reality so offensive to you?

So then would it be appropriate to say back that yeah “it’s a bummer your parents weren’t couldn’t help you.”

The reality is that a friend made a smug remark that many would construe as downplaying everything else the kid did to get there. It’s a moment thing, and if I felt a friend was making a dig, I’d call them on it because in reality, the intent was to hurt feelings or self soothe their own insecurity. Just comes off as a sore loser.

You are so wildly defensive and entitled. It’s remarkable to see. Your demands that your child never, ever hear that he had a significant leg up in admissions by virtue of legacy admissions are quite something. Stating the truth of legacy admissions—something that is extremely well-documented by data at this point—is not “being a jerk” no matter how much you want to demand the world hide the truth from your child.

In any event, it would be fine (in fact, quite good) for your kid to acknowledge that he got in because of significant legacy preferences and then to express understanding and sympathy that the other child wasn’t born with the same lucky circumstances of birth. That would be far preferable than your child having a tantrum and demanding that everyone protect his ego by propping up a lie, which seems to be your approach.

This is how people work. Sorry. No one is demanding anything. People can make these comments AND receive negative responses for said comments. It seem your upset that people interpret things differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

Ostrich (inability to say, yeah, it gives a boost!)…5x a number is a huge benefit in admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all a subset of American society as a whole. The privileged like to believe that they are the beneficiaries of hard work, when in reality they were born on second or third base into a system that benefits them. They argue that others simply have to work harder to have what they have. Look at the PP attacking other parents for not striving hard in high school to give their own kids legacy preference. But the systems are rigged. It's not a meritocracy. The privileged recognize this privately but don't like it spoken aloud, and they certainly do not like having it pointed out by someone who is not benefitting from the rigged systems. That person is brushed off as a "sore loser" or "rude."

The college admissions process is often the first time that many kids realize that it's not all about merit (and arguably, there is a certain privilege in this being the first dose of reality for those kids). So yeah, some of them are going to be upset and say the quiet part out loud.

The bolded is precisely what is going on in this thread from the legacy parents, including OP.

The kid was being a dick about it.

Legacy provides a small boost. It’s not the only reason why OP’s kid was admitted.

[Anonymous]

Why are there 15 pages of response to OP’s inane question? She seems to be sympathy baiting.

OP, congrats to your kid for their achievement. You don’t need DCUM’s sympathy to top it off for some trivial assumptions rightly or wrongly that your kid gets. Grow some thicker skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just smile and say nothing. Don’t say a word. The silence will make the person realize it was a rude comment. Likely a true comment, but still inappropriate. Sort of like commenting on weight loss or weight gain. True, but inappropriate.

People who get called out on the truth like to fall back on vague claims that something is "rude" or "inappropriate." It's not. It's just the truth.

The truth is they worked really hard in a number of areas and also had the benefit of legacy. Identifying legacy singularly comes off as sour grapes and should be treated as such. People aren’t robots, and having privilege doesn’t mean people have to deal with comments designed to hurt. In your internet world it might be “truth” but in the real world, it’s just being a dick. It’s an important lesson to learn that people can and will be offended by these comments so don’t be surprised.

This, thank you - again, these are just kids. Are they supposed to choose the non-legacy school over the legacy school to get rejected and prove a point to the jerks in their "community"? No thanks.

Of course not…but it is NOT mean when others say the truth aloud. You’re admitting if the same
Kid applied unhooked elsewhere, the chance of admission goes way down. Another kid saying what was already acknowledged privately in your family AND stating the truth isn’t mean.

Is it even necessary to say? How about ‘congrats.’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just smile and say nothing. Don’t say a word. The silence will make the person realize it was a rude comment. Likely a true comment, but still inappropriate. Sort of like commenting on weight loss or weight gain. True, but inappropriate.

People who get called out on the truth like to fall back on vague claims that something is "rude" or "inappropriate." It's not. It's just the truth.

The truth is they worked really hard in a number of areas and also had the benefit of legacy. Identifying legacy singularly comes off as sour grapes and should be treated as such. People aren’t robots, and having privilege doesn’t mean people have to deal with comments designed to hurt. In your internet world it might be “truth” but in the real world, it’s just being a dick. It’s an important lesson to learn that people can and will be offended by these comments so don’t be surprised.

This, thank you - again, these are just kids. Are they supposed to choose the non-legacy school over the legacy school to get rejected and prove a point to the jerks in their "community"? No thanks.

DP. No one is saying that. Far from it, in fact. Of course any kid with a legacy preference can and should use it. But downplaying it by claiming that it really doesn't help when all other stats are equal is disingenuous and inaccurate. You KNOW it's a huge boost--that's why you chose the legacy school. If another kid pointing that out is a jerk, that says more about you than them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

Ostrich (inability to say, yeah, it gives a boost!)…5x a number is a huge benefit in admissions

The vast majority - 75% - don’t get in. Not that much benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

Ostrich (inability to say, yeah, it gives a boost!)…5x a number is a huge benefit in admissions

The vast majority - 75% - don’t get in. Not that much benefit.

Still can’t admit it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just smile and say nothing. Don’t say a word. The silence will make the person realize it was a rude comment. Likely a true comment, but still inappropriate. Sort of like commenting on weight loss or weight gain. True, but inappropriate.

People who get called out on the truth like to fall back on vague claims that something is "rude" or "inappropriate." It's not. It's just the truth.

The truth is they worked really hard in a number of areas and also had the benefit of legacy. Identifying legacy singularly comes off as sour grapes and should be treated as such. People aren’t robots, and having privilege doesn’t mean people have to deal with comments designed to hurt. In your internet world it might be “truth” but in the real world, it’s just being a dick. It’s an important lesson to learn that people can and will be offended by these comments so don’t be surprised.

NP: why is it being a dick when it’s only said by someone outside the immediate family? If mom said: they do count legacy so this is great and should help - is she a dick?

Exactly. The PP and other legacy parents are fine with the discussion of the reality of legacy admissions being kept within the family. But when people outside the family, particularly people who don’t have access to the same admissions preferences, state the same thing, they rush to label that rude or “being a jerk.” What those legacy parents are actually doing is scrabbling to protect an unearned advantage for their kids by trying to suppress any discussion of that advantage.

If you have an advantage that most people do not have, and your immediate response is to try to suppress any public discussion of that advantage, all you are doing is trying to protect that advantage going forward for you and your kids. It is rank selfishness, nothing more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

Ostrich (inability to say, yeah, it gives a boost!)…5x a number is a huge benefit in admissions

Exactly.

Legacy had a 1-in-4 chance of admissions.

Friend with similar profile had a 1-in-20 chance.

Legacy got in.

Friend did not.

Friend understands that this is exactly what the odds would predict.

Legacy stomps his feet and sticks his head in the sand. “But I was qualified!” he wails.

So what? Your friend was equally qualified. Being qualified doesn’t get anyone into an elite school. Nearly all qualified applicants are rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

So innumerate.

Twice a very small number is still a very small number.

Willfully blind.

No, just better at math.

84% still don’t get in.

It can be up to a 5x greater chance for admission per the linked NYT article on research. You can be an ostrich but let’s be real: the kids and legacy parents have discussed the bump in admissions so why is it so hush hush outside the family?

5x a small number is still a small number.

5% -> 25%, the vast majority of legacy applicants are rejected. Many of them very well qualified.

The kid was rude. Most legacy kids don’t even get in.

Ostrich (inability to say, yeah, it gives a boost!)…5x a number is a huge benefit in admissions

The vast majority - 75% - don’t get in. Not that much benefit.

Your numerical illiteracy is noted.