My daughter didn't get into her first choice, which was my alma mater (she got waitlisted) although she was well positioned based on grades, SATs, etc. In the end, she is going to a school that has impressed me much more throughout the admissions process and now in the pre-college period, and has received merit aid and grants covering full tuition. If all goes well and she is happy there, I will probably donate to them instead in the future and no longer donate to my college. (Not a big donor so I doubt they'll miss me.)]

Ours has not applied to either of our alma maters. We're both more than fine with this. I really appreciate the approach he is taking to choosing the school that is the best fit for what he wants to do. I don't think either school would have been a good fit, even though he was in range to play those lotteries. I actually really like the choices he has, and if I could go back in time, I would have chosen one of those too.

Yes I would/will. Even though I objectively get it is likely to happen, I feel a stronger attachment to my alma mater so will feel the sting of rejection more personally.

Also, I hate when people say, “I wouldn’t get into my alma mater today!” - they mean they wouldn’t be qualified bc the test scores are so high, admit rate is so low, etc. Admissions is different but so too are the standardized test, ap and grading systems. It is much, much easier to score above 1500 on the SAT today than it was in 1985. Ditto it is much more common to load up on APs (my Churchill-esque HS in NY didn’t offer nearly as many as Churchill does today), and seeing my kids’ workloads I suspect the actual AP classes are easier today. It is also land of the As in grading. So you know what, I feel confident I’d have the qualifications to get into my alma mater today! The randomness of the process exacerbated by test optional would make me not count on it, of course. Which is why I suspect my own kids won’t get in and circling back yes I’ll be annoyed 😊.

Anonymous wrote:I went to an admissions session given by my alma mater for alumni who have children applying to the school. What really struck me is that they emphasized that kids with lots of advantages have to stand out more to get in. Which I get. But, it does sort of rankle that the school touts the success of its alumni but then the legacy kids are then deemed to have too many advantages because of their parents’ success.

Such a good point.

Anonymous wrote:I went to an admissions session given by my alma mater for alumni who have children applying to the school. What really struck me is that they emphasized that kids with lots of advantages have to stand out more to get in. Which I get. But, it does sort of rankle that the school touts the success of its alumni but then the legacy kids are then deemed to have too many advantages because of their parents’ success.

Assuming I gave my child every advantage beyond the basics, by which I mean opportunities for a great education and extracurricular development, as well as opportunities for travel, I'd be disappointed but not upset if s/he/they applied to my alma mater and didn't get accepted. I perceive no reason why the bar shouldn't be higher for those with the greatest access to resources. But then again, I'm not spoiled and entitled as so many posting here are.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, after my undergrad experience, I wasn't thrilled about my kids going to my alma mater (its the one that most DCUMers think is so awesome and we're so lucky that's its our in-state school!). I was just a number there.

I'm happy my kids went OOS and I could afford to do that for them.

Never understood why parents would pay OOS for state universities. For the price of OOS tuition, there are so many great private schools.