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:

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.

Yes any will still get in. Many won't

[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.

That means the applicant didn't

[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.

Sure, but there are vanishingly few of them. Only 1% of blacks and 2% of hispanics get a 1400+ on the SAT.
Meanwhile 7% of whites and 23% of asians get a 1400+ on the SAT.

[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.

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.

Sure, unless that background is a proxy for skin color.

[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.

A lot of things aren't legal and yet they still happen.

[Anonymous]

Why do y'all have to make every thread suck? This was supposed to be about Harvard freshman class and now the thread is filled with speculative arguments for and against AA. Get over it.

[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.

PP here. I fully support affirmative action. Unlike many on DCUM, I don't pick and choose based on whether I personally benefit from the practice.

[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.

There isn’t a “legacy box”. There are questions, as we all know, about where parents went to college and highest level of degrees. That’s across the board. I assume it is used as a proxy also for determining the applicants access to strong, educational support, and for verifying that someone is first generation college.

[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:

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.

There isn’t a “legacy box”. There are questions, as we all know, about where parents went to college and highest level of degrees. That’s across the board. I assume it is used as a proxy also for determining the applicants access to strong, educational support, and for verifying that someone is first generation college.

For Harvard, there is not a box but there is a "family history" section of the application where you write down your ties to Harvard, name, school, and year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do y'all have to make every thread suck? This was supposed to be about Harvard freshman class and now the thread is filled with speculative arguments for and against AA. Get over it.

So people should just sit down and shut up about the racial discrimination being levelled against their children?

[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.

PP here. I fully support affirmative action. Unlike many on DCUM, I don't pick and choose based on whether I personally benefit from the practice.

And what makes you think the other supporters of affirmative action do?

[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.

Sure, but there are vanishingly few of them. Only 1% of blacks and 2% of hispanics get a 1400+ on the SAT.
Meanwhile 7% of whites and 23% of asians get a 1400+ on the SAT.

Fine. Means that virtually all of those 1% and 2% URMs will get admitted to T25 level colleges if they so choose. 1500+ T10. They'll have the grades and ECs too.

[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.

PP here. I fully support affirmative action. Unlike many on DCUM, I don't pick and choose based on whether I personally benefit from the practice.

And what makes you think the other supporters of affirmative action do?

I'm confused. That was a general statement that extends beyond AA. I support preferences for recruited athletes, donors, kids of faculty, rural, students in the immediate region. etc.

[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.

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.

Sure, but there are vanishingly few of them. Only 1% of blacks and 2% of hispanics get a 1400+ on the SAT.
Meanwhile 7% of whites and 23% of asians get a 1400+ on the SAT.

Fine. Means that virtually all of those 1% and 2% URMs will get admitted to T25 level colleges if they so choose. 1500+ T10. They'll have the grades and ECs too.

Absolutely. Smart and accomplished black students have all the options. I don't understand why this isn't stressed more in the black community.

[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:

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.

There isn’t a “legacy box”. There are questions, as we all know, about where parents went to college and highest level of degrees. That’s across the board. I assume it is used as a proxy also for determining the applicants access to strong, educational support, and for verifying that someone is first generation college.

For Harvard, there is not a box but there is a "family history" section of the application where you write down your ties to Harvard, name, school, and year.

There is no family history section. Not anymore. I’d bet they are trying to be very careful because they know they are in the spotlight and everything will get scrutinized.