Big College Admissions Year at St. Albans

[Anonymous]

PP, if you google Harvard Crimson Legacy Admit Rate you will find a May 2011 Crimson article where Dean Fitzsimmons says the admit rate for legacies is around 30%.

[Anonymous]

Here's the Crimson article from above: www.thecrimson.harvard.edu/article/2011/5/11/admissions- Fitzsimmons-legacy-legacies/

More on that 3% figure and the impact of early action: www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/3/27/three-percent-admission-2016/

[Anonymous]

Thanks so much for the reference ( I am the poster who no one who is legacy should befried, because in my circle, they have basically 0% chance!!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks so much for the reference ( I am the poster who no one who is legacy should befried, because in my circle, they have basically 0% chance!!)

Living in the DMV area probably has something to do with it - so many great kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is legacy only parents or does it include grandparents/uncles/cousins etc?

It varies by the school. Northwestern asks about parents, grandparents, cousins, siblings, uncles, aunts, etc. Penn asks about parents. Harvard doesn't ask at all (but you list parents degrees on the Common App).

But Harvard is big on legacies, no? So their ADs must be going through the Common App with magnifying glasses.

LOL! But so worth it considering their current general admission rate is around 6% (virtually impossible) vs 33% for legacies.

No, the admissions rate for non-legacies is around 3%. The 5% general rate includes legacies, who are admitted at a rate of 30-35%.

I am a bit surprised at the 30-35% range for legacies. We know quite a few people (in a few cases, both parents are ex-Harvard) whose child/children have not been admitted, and it would be surprising if it is only our pool of acquaintances/friends who are legacies with a nearly 0% acceptance rate.... is this 30-35% something acknowledged by the AD? Or is it a guess?

We went to DH's 25th reunion at an Ivy and were surprised how many people had kids enrolled... And honestly, most of the people I know who attended an Ivy are legacies (direct - parent attended). Also, legacies tend to be big donors so it's worth it for the colleges. The 30-35% legacy admit rate seems the norm at Ivies, Stanford, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, if you google Harvard Crimson Legacy Admit Rate you will find a May 2011 Crimson article where Dean Fitzsimmons says the admit rate for legacies is around 30%.

Personally, I find the 30% admit rate for legacies a bit shocking. What ever happened to meritocracy? I find Fitzsimmons' claims that "some Harvard parents hesitate to push their legacy kids" and "we don't want to admit kids who would be unhappy" to be a little disingenuous. I know some argue that legacy kids are just as qualified as other admits, but why should they get what Fitzsimmons calls a "tip" that separates them from so many other equally qualified kids? It probably does come down to buying alumni support. Maybe this discussion belongs on the college thread, though.

(And before the inevitable attack comes my way: it's not sour grapes, because my DC got into an ivy without any hooks, despite being a legacy at a different ivy.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if you google Harvard Crimson Legacy Admit Rate you will find a May 2011 Crimson article where Dean Fitzsimmons says the admit rate for legacies is around 30%.

Personally, I find the 30% admit rate for legacies a bit shocking. What ever happened to meritocracy? I find Fitzsimmons' claims that "some Harvard parents hesitate to push their legacy kids" and "we don't want to admit kids who would be unhappy" to be a little disingenuous. I know some argue that legacy kids are just as qualified as other admits, but why should they get what Fitzsimmons calls a "tip" that separates them from so many other equally qualified kids? It probably does come down to buying alumni support. Maybe this discussion belongs on the college thread, though.

(And before the inevitable attack comes my way: it's not sour grapes, because my DC got into an ivy without any hooks, despite being a legacy at a different ivy.)

Your last sentence, the disclaimer, argues against you: studies have shown that the very legacies who in admission to Harvard also tend to win admission at a higher-than-normal rate at HYPMS schools where they are not legacies, showing that it is the legacy pool is an extremely qualified pool and that it's not legacy status that wins them admission so much as their qualifications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if you google Harvard Crimson Legacy Admit Rate you will find a May 2011 Crimson article where Dean Fitzsimmons says the admit rate for legacies is around 30%.

Personally, I find the 30% admit rate for legacies a bit shocking. What ever happened to meritocracy? I find Fitzsimmons' claims that "some Harvard parents hesitate to push their legacy kids" and "we don't want to admit kids who would be unhappy" to be a little disingenuous. I know some argue that legacy kids are just as qualified as other admits, but why should they get what Fitzsimmons calls a "tip" that separates them from so many other equally qualified kids? It probably does come down to buying alumni support. Maybe this discussion belongs on the college thread, though.

(And before the inevitable attack comes my way: it's not sour grapes, because my DC got into an ivy without any hooks, despite being a legacy at a different ivy.)

Your last sentence, the disclaimer, argues against you: studies have shown that the very legacies who in admission to Harvard also tend to win admission at a higher-than-normal rate at HYPMS schools where they are not legacies, showing that it is the legacy pool is an extremely qualified pool and that it's not legacy status that wins them admission so much as their qualifications.

Let's face it, most kids who apply to Harvard and other ivies are extremely well qualified. The kids with SATs of 1800 and unweighted GPAs below 3.90 probably aren't going to bother filling out the application and paying the fee, except for some percentage who do it on pure whim because, you know, it's Harvard/Yale/Whatever. I agree with you to the extent you're arguing that legacy kids are probably going to be well qualified, because they've usually enjoyed lots of advantages in education and upbringing. But this just puts them in a pile with 30,000 other equally qualified kids. I'm questioning the Crimson article statement that, in a pool of 30,000 kids--let's say 90% of whom have SATs above 2200 and near-perfect GPAs--legacy status will tip one of two otherwise identical kids, into the admit pile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if you google Harvard Crimson Legacy Admit Rate you will find a May 2011 Crimson article where Dean Fitzsimmons says the admit rate for legacies is around 30%.

Personally, I find the 30% admit rate for legacies a bit shocking. What ever happened to meritocracy? I find Fitzsimmons' claims that "some Harvard parents hesitate to push their legacy kids" and "we don't want to admit kids who would be unhappy" to be a little disingenuous. I know some argue that legacy kids are just as qualified as other admits, but why should they get what Fitzsimmons calls a "tip" that separates them from so many other equally qualified kids? It probably does come down to buying alumni support. Maybe this discussion belongs on the college thread, though.

(And before the inevitable attack comes my way: it's not sour grapes, because my DC got into an ivy without any hooks, despite being a legacy at a different ivy.)

I would like to see a study that compared the Harvard/Ivies legacy applicant pool to the non-legacy applicant pool using some sort of quantifiable metric -- I guess SATs is what there is, as school GPAs vary so wildly. (Such studies might be out there, would love to see them if somebody has a link.) From observation only (so this is not statistically valid), the legacy kids who get in from our school are also often superlative students (National Merit Scholarship Finalists) who get into non-legacy schools as well (I'm thinking of a student who won a Morehead Scholarship, pretty stunning pool of winners, who attended the Ivy at which the student was a legacy, or a student who is a Presidential Scholar, also a pretty stunning pool, who attended the Ivy at which the student is a legacy). I remember from my own college days some rather dimmer bulbs from august (and robustly donating) legacy families, so maybe the overall numbers of the legacy pool are not that impressive -- but I'd like to see the numbers.

[Anonymous]

Search for Thomas Espenshade's paper. He did the analysis your describing and talked about how much a legacy adds to admissions value. He also argued IIRC that although legacy applicants have an admissions advantage in a one-on-one comparison to another hypothetical applicant, there are relatively few legacy applicants compared to the massive pool of non-legacies, so their actual impact is relatively small.

[Anonymous]

Oops. You're.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I would like to see a study that compared the Harvard/Ivies legacy applicant pool to the non-legacy applicant pool using some sort of quantifiable metric -- I guess SATs is what there is, as school GPAs vary so wildly. (Such studies might be out there, would love to see them if somebody has a link.) From observation only (so this is not statistically valid), the legacy kids who get in from our school are also often superlative students (National Merit Scholarship Finalists) who get into non-legacy schools as well (I'm thinking of a student who won a Morehead Scholarship, pretty stunning pool of winners, who attended the Ivy at which the student was a legacy, or a student who is a Presidential Scholar, also a pretty stunning pool, who attended the Ivy at which the student is a legacy). I remember from my own college days some rather dimmer bulbs from august (and robustly donating) legacy families, so maybe the overall numbers of the legacy pool are not that impressive -- but I'd like to see the numbers.

They ALL have SAT>2200. The legacies, the non-legacies and plenty of rejected/waitlisted applicants have SAT>2200. And, of course, comparable extracurriculars, GPAs and other accomplishments like Presidential Scholarships or even NMSSFs with those SATs.

That's why this seems so unfair. It must burn to know that your chance of getting in is 3% but the legacy kid in your class, with the same SAT as yours, has a 30% chance. The word "tip" for describing a 10X increase in admissions odds is an understatement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Search for Thomas Espenshade's paper. He did the analysis your describing and talked about how much a legacy adds to admissions value. He also argued IIRC that although legacy applicants have an admissions advantage in a one-on-one comparison to another hypothetical applicant, there are relatively few legacy applicants compared to the massive pool of non-legacies, so their actual impact is relatively small.

Read Goldin's book, Price of Admission. He talks about legacies and how they reduce the chances for all the other equally qualified applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Search for Thomas Espenshade's paper. He did the analysis your describing and talked about how much a legacy adds to admissions value. He also argued IIRC that although legacy applicants have an admissions advantage in a one-on-one comparison to another hypothetical applicant, there are relatively few legacy applicants compared to the massive pool of non-legacies, so their actual impact is relatively small.

Read Goldin's book, Price of Admission. He talks about legacies and how they reduce the chances for all the other equally qualified applicants.

Also how legacies tend to come from privileged families, so this is just perpetuating privilege. It's been called "affirmative action for the rich."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Search for Thomas Espenshade's paper. He did the analysis your describing and talked about how much a legacy adds to admissions value. He also argued IIRC that although legacy applicants have an admissions advantage in a one-on-one comparison to another hypothetical applicant, there are relatively few legacy applicants compared to the massive pool of non-legacies, so their actual impact is relatively small.

Espenshade teaches at Princeton. FWIW.