Harvard freshman survey insights for class of 2028

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

If you support legacy admissions, you clearly do not support using tests alone. All the other kids had to make themselves appealing with time consuming competitive ECs while the legacy has a test score. Perhaps the legacy was also a world champion squash player but they still checked the legacy box and so they relief on the legacy boost to get in.

[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).

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.

Then what is the complaint other than other than general whining that your skin color privilege is being taken away?

[Anonymous]

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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

[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: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).

If you support legacy admissions, you clearly do not support using tests alone. All the other kids had to make themselves appealing with time consuming competitive ECs while the legacy has a test score. Perhaps the legacy was also a world champion squash player but they still checked the legacy box and so they relief on the legacy boost to get in.

It looks like the legacy kid mentioned above had worked on time consuming ECs and had top grades - it’s not like you know you’ll get in when you are in 9th grade and so just coast until you get to check a box. And so point was that assuming they were as qualified grade and EC-wise, it looks like the average test scores of legacies is higher on average. If they want to stop legacy, fine. But many will likely still get in, or will get in somewhere else in T10.

[Anonymous]

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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Nope.

The parents earned it.

[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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Nope.

The parents earned it.

A ridiculous take.

[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.

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.

Then the URMs that do will have no problem getting admitted over your kid.

Thanks.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Then the URMs that do will have no problem getting admitted over your kid.

Thanks.

Yup. No problem with that.

[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.

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.

Then the URMs that do will have no problem getting admitted over your kid.

Thanks.

Yup. No problem with that.

It’s up to the school what stats they value. Background gives a lot of additional information. Sour grapes here to persist.

[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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

indeed, even your skin color.

Having parents who have the means to put you in a great activity is one thing, but in order to get a leadership position or excel at it, the student has to put in the effort. Sure, the parents could hire tutors or coaches or what not to help the kid, but no amount of tutoring or coaching is going to make that kid a superstar athlete or leader without some work on their part.

FWIW, I'm Asian American, from a lowly educated immigrant family. I am UMC now, and my kids have some advantages due to our finances, but so do the two lawyer parent black family households that live in my neighborhood.

I have no doubt that the black parents worked hard to get where they are, but so did I, with no parental help (not even help with hw since they couldn't speak English), yet, my kids are held to a higher standard than their kids.

And before someone says that Asian Americans are over represented in top colleges.. 1. it makes no sense to compare the representation with the overall population; if anything, the comparison should be made with the applicant pool and 2. so what if they are over represented? They worked for it, too.

[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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

indeed, even your skin color.

Having parents who have the means to put you in a great activity is one thing, but in order to get a leadership position or excel at it, the student has to put in the effort. Sure, the parents could hire tutors or coaches or what not to help the kid, but no amount of tutoring or coaching is going to make that kid a superstar athlete or leader without some work on their part.

FWIW, I'm Asian American, from a lowly educated immigrant family. I am UMC now, and my kids have some advantages due to our finances, but so do the two lawyer parent black family households that live in my neighborhood.

I have no doubt that the black parents worked hard to get where they are, but so did I, with no parental help (not even help with hw since they couldn't speak English), yet, my kids are held to a higher standard than their kids.

And before someone says that Asian Americans are over represented in top colleges.. 1. it makes no sense to compare the representation with the overall population; if anything, the comparison should be made with the applicant pool and 2. so what if they are over represented? They worked for it, too.

News flash: affirmative action (aside from legacies) is no longer legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Thanks for getting back to me-- my kid confirmed this. Something about in the Common App the kid lists the schools their parents attended (if any) and it would be deceptive not to fill this out. So even if there's no advantage for legacy, the applicant is "stuck" with it.

Maybe for Harvard they just don't take it into consideration one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

indeed, even your skin color.

Having parents who have the means to put you in a great activity is one thing, but in order to get a leadership position or excel at it, the student has to put in the effort. Sure, the parents could hire tutors or coaches or what not to help the kid, but no amount of tutoring or coaching is going to make that kid a superstar athlete or leader without some work on their part.

FWIW, I'm Asian American, from a lowly educated immigrant family. I am UMC now, and my kids have some advantages due to our finances, but so do the two lawyer parent black family households that live in my neighborhood.

I have no doubt that the black parents worked hard to get where they are, but so did I, with no parental help (not even help with hw since they couldn't speak English), yet, my kids are held to a higher standard than their kids.

And before someone says that Asian Americans are over represented in top colleges.. 1. it makes no sense to compare the representation with the overall population; if anything, the comparison should be made with the applicant pool and 2. so what if they are over represented? They worked for it, too.

News flash: affirmative action (aside from legacies) is no longer legal.

Per many on here, and SCOTUS, colleges can curate any student body they wish. They don't have to use academic measures only. There's another thread on this forum about a URM parent seeking advice on how to benefit from their URM race for college admissions.

Quotas are illegal, but students can still write about their background (race), and colleges can still take that into account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

indeed, even your skin color.

Having parents who have the means to put you in a great activity is one thing, but in order to get a leadership position or excel at it, the student has to put in the effort. Sure, the parents could hire tutors or coaches or what not to help the kid, but no amount of tutoring or coaching is going to make that kid a superstar athlete or leader without some work on their part.

FWIW, I'm Asian American, from a lowly educated immigrant family. I am UMC now, and my kids have some advantages due to our finances, but so do the two lawyer parent black family households that live in my neighborhood.

I have no doubt that the black parents worked hard to get where they are, but so did I, with no parental help (not even help with hw since they couldn't speak English), yet, my kids are held to a higher standard than their kids.

And before someone says that Asian Americans are over represented in top colleges.. 1. it makes no sense to compare the representation with the overall population; if anything, the comparison should be made with the applicant pool and 2. so what if they are over represented? They worked for it, too.

News flash: affirmative action (aside from legacies) is no longer legal.

Colleges bend over backward to admit you if you are a first-generation trans black latino with good grades. You write about this in the essays, half of which are about diversity.

[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. Legacy is an unearned hook.

Pray tell, what is an earned hook? All of them are based on who your parents are.

I think you can argue that athletic recruitment is an earned hook