Harvard freshman survey insights for class of 2028

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

I would absolutely utilize legacy status for my kid if it helped at all. I was a FGLI student at a regional state university, but the real world is built on relationships. Also, I haven’t donated a dime to any of these schools, while PP may have contributed donations over the years and brought something unique to campus years ago. Legacy students have something to contribute as well. Exposure to different types of students and backgrounds is a great thing for young adults.

Such is life. There are areas of life where we all have privilege we were born into.

Pretty sure legacy students are not bringing a “different type” of anything. Their background is usually very much the standard “type” for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

I would absolutely utilize legacy status for my kid if it helped at all. I was a FGLI student at a regional state university, but the real world is built on relationships. Also, I haven’t donated a dime to any of these schools, while PP may have contributed donations over the years and brought something unique to campus years ago. Legacy students have something to contribute as well. Exposure to different types of students and backgrounds is a great thing for young adults.

Such is life. There are areas of life where we all have privilege we were born into.

Then don't say sh*t when a URM with similar stats gets admitted.

I assume they argue a 50 points Sat advantage from a highly competitive private/affluent public school sets them apart from URM. Schools will have to decide if that’s the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

I would absolutely utilize legacy status for my kid if it helped at all. I was a FGLI student at a regional state university, but the real world is built on relationships. Also, I haven’t donated a dime to any of these schools, while PP may have contributed donations over the years and brought something unique to campus years ago. Legacy students have something to contribute as well. Exposure to different types of students and backgrounds is a great thing for young adults.

Such is life. There are areas of life where we all have privilege we were born into.

Then don't say sh*t when a URM with similar stats gets admitted.

Well, the problem is, there aren’t many URMs with similar stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who says these Ivory tower institutions discriminate against Republicans...where is the outrage:

When breaking down test scores by political affiliation, the average score for students who self-reported as Democrats was 1527, nearly 70 points higher than the average score of students who identified as Republicans. The average ACT score for Democratic students in the Class of 2028 was 34, two points higher than the average score for Republican students, which sits at 32. Approximately 10 times more students self-identified as Democrat than Republican.

It would be interesting to see how many of the Republicans were recruited athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

If he gets in, he did earn it, look at his stats.

But, students with even higher stats don't get into ivies. It's the legacy that gives people like ^^ a bump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says these Ivory tower institutions discriminate against Republicans...where is the outrage:

When breaking down test scores by political affiliation, the average score for students who self-reported as Democrats was 1527, nearly 70 points higher than the average score of students who identified as Republicans. The average ACT score for Democratic students in the Class of 2028 was 34, two points higher than the average score for Republican students, which sits at 32. Approximately 10 times more students self-identified as Democrat than Republican.

There is likely affirmative action for conservatives. It’s hard to find qualified and interested conservatives. They may also be disproportionately from rural high schools with fewer resources. The colleges do want diversity of political thought.

Where’s that group suing Harvard for AA violations? We need them on the case.

The 14th amendment doesn't cover political ideology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard was test optional last year !! The score report means nothing. Only the high scorers submitted

I don’t think Harvard took a ton of kids test optional, thought Harvard and Yale took less than 20 percent to.

I think 85% of admits submitted test scores last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says these Ivory tower institutions discriminate against Republicans...where is the outrage:

When breaking down test scores by political affiliation, the average score for students who self-reported as Democrats was 1527, nearly 70 points higher than the average score of students who identified as Republicans. The average ACT score for Democratic students in the Class of 2028 was 34, two points higher than the average score for Republican students, which sits at 32. Approximately 10 times more students self-identified as Democrat than Republican.

That is a combination of the legacy preference and the athletic preferences.

The article specifically indicates that legacy students had higher average test scores than non-legacy.

Is it possible that being a legacy actually hurts your application? My kid is a legacy with 1560 SAT-- would they stand out more as an applicant if they didn't mention legacy?

My daughter at Harvard saw her admission file (any student can see it if they request it). On the one page summary of the student that they pass around it shows where the parents went to university, so it will be there even if he didn't write about it in a supplemental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

If he gets in, he did earn it, look at his stats.

But, students with even higher stats don't get into ivies. It's the legacy that gives people like ^^ a bump.

And students with even lower stats do get in, including unhooked students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

Legacy is a conferred status and advantage that has absolutely nothing to do with what an applicant brings to the table admissions wise.

The fact the a kid with a 36 ACT will still try to leverage legacy status says it all.


But URMs!

Racial discrimination is illegal.
Legacy discrimination is not.

if you don't like it, get the constitution amended. But until you do, don't expect people to stand by and tolerate being racially discriminated against just because they haven't eliminated all other sources of unfairness in the process. Seriously why does racial discrimination have to be the last thing that gets addressed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

If he gets in, he did earn it, look at his stats.

But not really, because so many rejected applicants have the same or better stats.

Your jealousy is showing.

DP. Legacy is an unearned hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

If he gets in, he did earn it, look at his stats.

But not really, because so many rejected applicants have the same or better stats.

Your jealousy is showing.

DP. I don't think it's jealousy. If everyone has 1550s & 4.6s and one of those 1550 4.6s gets chosen out of a pool of 1550 4.6s that's not because they worked hard for that 1550 and 4.6. Maybe it's what got them into the race but it's not what got them to the finish line.

DP. I don’t get the grudge against a very qualified applicant getting admitted.

Because he relied on an unearned legacy hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

I would absolutely utilize legacy status for my kid if it helped at all. I was a FGLI student at a regional state university, but the real world is built on relationships. Also, I haven’t donated a dime to any of these schools, while PP may have contributed donations over the years and brought something unique to campus years ago. Legacy students have something to contribute as well. Exposure to different types of students and backgrounds is a great thing for young adults.

Such is life. There are areas of life where we all have privilege we were born into.

Then don't say sh*t when a URM with similar stats gets admitted.

DP.

URM with similar stats are not the one people are saying shit about. Average URM SAT is not 70 points higher than average at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

It sounds like he's a great kid who doesn't need legacy to get into a competitive school.

Wouldn't it better if he felt like he earned it, instead of being burdened with the feeling that he only got in because his mom went there?

I suspect a lot of bright kids would prefer to feel confident they got in on their own merits. "Legacy" is a loser hook and that's going to bother them as they go forward in life - unless they're shallow and status obsessed and don't have a lot of self worth. I really think legacy is more of a burden for smart kids. It's a psychological hit.

If he gets in, he did earn it, look at his stats.

But not really, because so many rejected applicants have the same or better stats.

Your jealousy is showing.

DP. I don't think it's jealousy. If everyone has 1550s & 4.6s and one of those 1550 4.6s gets chosen out of a pool of 1550 4.6s that's not because they worked hard for that 1550 and 4.6. Maybe it's what got them into the race but it's not what got them to the finish line.

DP. I don’t get the grudge against a very qualified applicant getting admitted.

Because he relied on an unearned legacy hook.

What do you mean “relied” on? I mean I know there is still consideration given among admissible candidates, but the stats looked like they would have been admissible to other T5s. And they were above most other students (at least test-wise).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that legacy kids actually had higher scores than non-legacy kids.

nothing that 20 hours of private tutoring doesn't account for

My son is a legacy. 36 ACT, top of class at highly competitive private, national awards in two areas, nice person with solid friendships and does a lot of community service out of interest and care. People are already pretty explicitly stating that, if he gets in, it’s because he’s a legacy. I just remind him that, if the worst thing about his college process is that people attribute his admission to legacy, he should be thankful and move on performing well and ignore anyone who is saying it to be insulting while also recognizing that legacy in fact does help.

Just to say not all legacies have extra tutoring (he took ACT once, no tutoring).

Legacy is a conferred status and advantage that has absolutely nothing to do with what an applicant brings to the table admissions wise.

The fact the a kid with a 36 ACT will still try to leverage legacy status says it all.


But URMs!

Racial discrimination is illegal.
Legacy discrimination is not.

if you don't like it, get the constitution amended. But until you do, don't expect people to stand by and tolerate being racially discriminated against just because they haven't eliminated all other sources of unfairness in the process. Seriously why does racial discrimination have to be the last thing that gets addressed?

States are starting to ban legacy admissions too.

You're welcome.