How does legacy admission really work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Show me ONE poster who said - "my kid didn't really have the stats to be considered for admission, but they got in anyway!" - you can't there are none. Every single admit had the stats to be considered on their own merit.

If unfair legacy admission was a thing, there would already have been a Supreme Court decision on the fairness of it.

Mrs Kushner has entered the chat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Show me ONE poster who said - "my kid didn't really have the stats to be considered for admission, but they got in anyway!" - you can't there are none. Every single admit had the stats to be considered on their own merit.

If unfair legacy admission was a thing, there would already have been a Supreme Court decision on the fairness of it.

Mrs Kushner has entered the chat

Kushner's father purchased his admission. That happens with some frequency but that is a different topic than the one we're discussing in this thread.

[Anonymous]

I’m a Harvard non-donating legacy whose kid has the strong stats, strong but not national
ECs. I don’t expect her to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

You are choosing to inflate the importance of legacy, even with AO's and alumni saying it really isn't that much of an advantage.
None of the Ivy legacies at my kid's school got in last year, FWIW, but you will probably discount that data point.
It's just not the "thing" people think it is.

I’m not inflating it. My own child benefited from legacy status. It was literally notated in their admissions file which they reviewed upon matriculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

You are choosing to inflate the importance of legacy, even with AO's and alumni saying it really isn't that much of an advantage.
None of the Ivy legacies at my kid's school got in last year, FWIW, but you will probably discount that data point.
It's just not the "thing" people think it is.

+1 It just makes people feel better about their own kid's rejection to blame it on the legacies

I’m the Stanford grad poster above whose legacy kid got in REA, so I don’t see how you could possibly make this argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

You are choosing to inflate the importance of legacy, even with AO's and alumni saying it really isn't that much of an advantage.
None of the Ivy legacies at my kid's school got in last year, FWIW, but you will probably discount that data point.
It's just not the "thing" people think it is.

I’m not inflating it. My own child benefited from legacy status. It was literally notated in their admissions file which they reviewed upon matriculation.

And to address your point about many legacies getting denied, YES, of course more legacies are denied than accepted. But there is no disputing that the very low absolute odds of acceptance are relatively higher for legacies vs. non-legacies, at least at Stanford and Harvard (the two institutions with which my specific family is most familiar).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They say there is no connection between the development office and the admissions office (but top top donors are in a different category, I suppose). Development officers aren't supposed to ask for donations from alum whose kids are in the current application cycle (heard this directly from ours). I'm not sure how it really works. We've had family members get in with legacy and also rejected with legacy.

Some colleges have a development officer sit in admissions. It’s important to know which schools those are. Ask your schools college counseling team.

Not so at our HYP. Dev office and admissions are completely separate. Would you really ask your school counseling team? I would feel silly since we’re not mega donors. DC was accepted. We’re just not al donors.

I know for a fact, it is true at two T10 schools.

If you have a private college counselor, I would ask them. Why are you posting if you don’t need the help for the next cycle?

Vandy does this, don’t think anyone else does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any luck with Princeton?

Yes, DC was accepted REA this cycle. He didn't apply anywhere else so I can't say if he was equally "qualified" for other Ivies. But no other family members (with arguably better stats) or anyone in our circle of friends (all with legacy) have been accepted, so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

Isn't Stanford the only school where being legacy guarantees 2 AO read your application? Increases likelihood of going to committee vs. rejection by regional rep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

Isn't Stanford the only school where being legacy guarantees 2 AO read your application? Increases likelihood of going to committee vs. rejection by regional rep.

Yes, it is a definitely "tip" at Stanford.

https://orieladmissions.com/stanford-legacy-admissions/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lee Coffin, Dean of Admissions for Dartmouth, says on his podcast The Admissions Beat that legacy is not a thumb on the scale, but is a "feather on the scale." So, basically, a tie breaker. I believe it's a tiebreaker at Princeton also, because they have said previously that legacy only "mattered" to a small number of kids (I think they said maybe 33 or something like that, don't quote me).

My legacy kid got into an Ivy where we donate small amounts, but was rejected to a lower tier college (DH's alma mater) where we donated zero, so I do think (from a data point of 1) that giving something - even if small - for at least a few years does matter.

Finally, my legacy kid wanted to shoot for HYPMS and was rejected early, but still got into my legacy school RD, so I don't think it's essential that they apply early, but that's what we were told by many people. I know someone who applied early to their parent's legacy school and got in early, but I think they sort of felt like they *had* to apply early there or would have "no chance" at it.

Stanford, my alma mater, also calls it a feather on the scale. When there are so many highly qualified applicants vying for so few spots, however, I’m sure that feather can feel like a thumb.

Hmm. The last four admits I know to Stanford were all legacies. But that is just my personal experience, of course.

That’s why I said it feels like a thumb. It is quite an advantage.

Isn't Stanford the only school where being legacy guarantees 2 AO read your application? Increases likelihood of going to committee vs. rejection by regional rep.

Harvard and, I believe, Penn also extend “extra read” privileges to legacy applicants.

[Anonymous]

My double legacy kid got into an Ivy, RD. We never gave the said Ivy a penny. I don't know if being a double legavy helped and how much.