Reply to Early Decision Results at DS or DD school

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Early Decision Results at DS or DD school"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]True for many schools, but Yale has need blind admissions. Regardless of whether you are on FA, legacy is a huge boost. 
http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Admission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004%20full.pdf[/quote]
Interesting to see in that study that legacy applicants average higher SAT scores than non-legacy applicants -- legacies score 18 points higher on average.  
[quote=page 1430] ... athletes in the applicant pools have lower average SAT scores than nonathletes (1298 vs. 1335), whereas there is a smaller gap between legacies (1350) and nonlegacies (1332)[/quote][/quote]
PP again, to correct myself.  Those averages are not for the applicants, but rather for the admitted students from the study.  So legacies who were admitted averaged 18 points higher on the SAT than those non-legacies who were admitted.  [/quote]

"The
bonus for African-American applicants is roughly equivalent to an extra 230
SAT points (on a 1600-point scale), to 185 points for Hispanics, 200 points
for athletes, and [b]160 points for children of alumni.[/b] The Asian disadvantage
is comparable to a loss of 50 SAT points."[/quote]

Somehow I knew you were going to wind up here (lots of us have read that study). Tell us, what does that study, which deals with regular admits,  have to do with SCEA or ED?[/quote]

You knew this because all of these discussions end up in the same place. [i] The innocents on this forum who thought that racial profiling of the SFS admits to Yale would end up in a different place are completely naïve.  It is always about race or some other hidden advantage and never about the relative merits of the candidates.[/i][b]  If you want a strategy that will help your kids get into places like Yale then you should encourage them to get exceptional grades, become leaders in their activities, prepare well for standardized tests, be good people, and represent themselves fairly and authentically in the application process.  This formula is no guarantee of success at any one college, of course.  But it is certainly true of ALL of the admits being discussed here.  Not speculation, I know each of them well.[/quote]

Please, I am one of those "innocents", and there is a big difference between asking (and having someone familiar with the students volunteer or post the information) about the admitted students, and engaging in "profiling".  As the posts above demonstrate, young women and men are admitted for many different qualifying attributes.  You are just as likely to have a URM who is a gifted musician with a 2350 SAT, as you are to have the first-generation to college with a 2250 from a small farming town who is an talented writer; and you are as likely to encounter a legacy with a 4.0/2400, as to encounter a legacy with a 2230 sat but incredible athletic ability.  In other words, you cannot make assumptions about a student's scores or grades or academic achievements, based on their backgrounds.

What you can draw conclusions about, based on admitted students, is that colleges value individuals with many different attributes including, but not limited to, a developed talent, an internal honesty, a demonstrated passion, an athletic ability, a different perspective, a good heart, an underrepresented background, a commitment to others, an involved family, or a unique connection.[/quote]

That is a lovely sentiment but just doesn't represent the conversation, where many[b] posters are looking for a shorthand or a reduction of someone's candidacy to one or two variables (URM, legacy, connected parents..[/b][i].).  This thread has not been a full conversation about the longer list of worthy characteristics that you articulate (largely because the facts are not known to the general population).  I fully believe that the intentions of many of the posters are pure.  For others, that is not the case and the takeaways will simply be that so and so got in because [you fill in the blank].[/quote]

I want to re-articulate this as the parent of an Ivy League student (see you at the game, :wink: ), I do not think that people are reducing someone's candidacy to URM, or legacy, or connected parents.  I think that intelligent, informed people realize that a candidate is more than any one thing; rather, they are "the complete package", so to speak.  But I also think that it is disingenuous to say that every little thing does not help a candidacy, each in its own way.  People are curious, because - let's face it - people want to know about every little factor that helps.

My own child is/was that academically perfect student described above - all of their teachers and classmates knew that - but they were also a legacy at the college they attend, as well as a URM.  There is no shame in being any one of those things, and I never took offense when someone would ask if they were a legacy, because "yes" they are - and we are proud of that fact.  Was DC admitted for their perfect grades and scores - likely yes.  Did it also help that they were a legacy?  And a URM - likely yes.  Was there more to their application than just those factors - yes again, much, much more.  To know those other things, beyond the more easily-discernable attributes just mentioned, you would have to get to know DC.

On a public forum like this there is simply no way to discuss the more important "human" or "personal" attributes that really define who these students are, but I can still understand the desire of some posters to want to unearth those other admissions factors which are more easily quantifiable - for purposes of better understanding the admissions process.[/quote]

Again, lovely thoughts.  But, I am not letting you off the hook that easily.  How frequently does someone come up to you at a cocktail party and ask, "Did you also go to XX school as well?"  versus, "Was your son/daughter the captain of the soccer team, president of debate, or editor of the paper?"  If folks are genuine in their interest to better understand the many factors that matter, they would lead with the second question, rather than rely on legacy status or the obvious factor that can be gleaned simply by looking at you (i.e. color of your skin).  At the end of the day, I am glad that there are people like you with kind and trusting hearts.  
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics