Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a legacy kid at Princeton. Should probably not assume anything about their qualifications, as this kid had single-sitting 36/4.0 in high school and has one A- at Princeton in a rigorous major. This kid can compete with anyone and don't see why given equivalent stats, a university should be criticized for admitting them. This is anecdotal of course, but my point is don't assume.

But why should your kid with these stats get a boost over another with the same stats? They shouldn't.....

I guess my question back to you is why not? What are your proposed more objective criteria to adjudicate this situation given perfect scores? One could argue for a lottery of course or a matching algorithm, but I don't think that is a possibility. Thus, I think legacy status is a reasonable differentiating factor to be considered.

Because when a college states that it wants diversity, they aren't achieving that when they admit 43% legacy. It's just the same ol' same ol' from the same families. This doesn't breed diversity. It breeds an insular environment. Seems counter to all their talk about diversity.

This is on Havard's website:

"We continue to believe deeply that a thriving diverse intellectual community is essential to academic excellence. "

How are they achieving that when almost half their student body comes from the same families from previous generations, mostly wealthy and white.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a legacy kid at Princeton. Should probably not assume anything about their qualifications, as this kid had single-sitting 36/4.0 in high school and has one A- at Princeton in a rigorous major. This kid can compete with anyone and don't see why given equivalent stats, a university should be criticized for admitting them. This is anecdotal of course, but my point is don't assume.

Aren’t you then “assuming” your legacy kid would have gotten in as a non-legacy?

+1 my magnet kid took the SAT once, and one practice SAT. 1580. 4.95 wGPA, 4.0 uwGPA, is the type of kid who can finish a 45min math test in 15min without studying for it.

Rejected at T20s that he applied to.

Don't assume your kid could've got in without legacy.

Not assuming they would have been admitted at all, and there's really no way to interrogate that situation. The only assumption I'm asking you to NOT make is that my kid is somehow less qualified than the entire pool of candidates just because they are a legacy. Objectively, this is not the case as they had perfect scores, and enough ECs to support. I'm essentially just pointing out that there is potential for a logical fallacy here, given that no one has all the information, and the conventional wisdom seems to be that legacies are somehow "less than".

The mere point that you feel the point out that they are not "less than" shows that you are out of touch with reality of so many other perfect stats kids. How about be just own it and be humble and grateful for the leg up your child had at your alma mater. Legacy/VIP parents brining up how great their kids' stats are and how they are succeeding just rubs salt in the wound. And yes - some legacy have lower stats ..... so you just need to live with whatever people think. If you care so much about whether people will assume "to lesser" - then feel free to try have your children take a shot in the regular pool and attend a non-legacy school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

Many kids at ivies suffer from imposter syndrome. Even those that did not have a hook of some sort. So I can imagine that legacy kids (esp those that were not admitted to peer schools may second guess their admittance. They know what others think about their admittance due to legacy. Some speak their thoughts out loud, but way more are just thinking it.

DP. Imposter syndrome could, I think, apply to those students who know their stats are meaningfully lower than the school’s usual numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a legacy kid at Princeton. Should probably not assume anything about their qualifications, as this kid had single-sitting 36/4.0 in high school and has one A- at Princeton in a rigorous major. This kid can compete with anyone and don't see why given equivalent stats, a university should be criticized for admitting them. This is anecdotal of course, but my point is don't assume.

But why should your kid with these stats get a boost over another with the same stats? They shouldn't.....

I guess my question back to you is why not? What are your proposed more objective criteria to adjudicate this situation given perfect scores? One could argue for a lottery of course or a matching algorithm, but I don't think that is a possibility. Thus, I think legacy status is a reasonable differentiating factor to be considered.

On what basis? What will a legacy admit bring to the school that a non-legacy with identical stats will not?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

Many kids at ivies suffer from imposter syndrome. Even those that did not have a hook of some sort. So I can imagine that legacy kids (esp those that were not admitted to peer schools may second guess their admittance. They know what others think about their admittance due to legacy. Some speak their thoughts out loud, but way more are just thinking it.

It sounds like this is your dream rather than reality. You come across as an awful, envious person.

You must not have a kid at an ivy. My oldest graduated from HYP (not legacy) and younger child currently attends a different one. Also have friends with kids at HYP who are legacy admits. They have told me what their kids have shared regarding classmates’ comments made to them knowing their legacy status. My own kids felt imposter syndrome at the beginning and said many of their friends did too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

Many kids at ivies suffer from imposter syndrome. Even those that did not have a hook of some sort. So I can imagine that legacy kids (esp those that were not admitted to peer schools may second guess their admittance. They know what others think about their admittance due to legacy. Some speak their thoughts out loud, but way more are just thinking it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

Many kids at ivies suffer from imposter syndrome. Even those that did not have a hook of some sort. So I can imagine that legacy kids (esp those that were not admitted to peer schools may second guess their admittance. They know what others think about their admittance due to legacy. Some speak their thoughts out loud, but way more are just thinking it.

It sounds like this is your dream rather than reality. You come across as an awful, envious person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

Many kids at ivies suffer from imposter syndrome. Even those that did not have a hook of some sort. So I can imagine that legacy kids (esp those that were not admitted to peer schools may second guess their admittance. They know what others think about their admittance due to legacy. Some speak their thoughts out loud, but way more are just thinking it.

Anonymous wrote:

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

I don't know a single kid who's worried about what other people think regarding their college admission.

I think this is great. They can feel proud and never have anyone (including themself) second guess their admittance.

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High stat DC got into an Ivy this year.
-not a legacy
-not an athlete
-not an URM
-not a faculty kid
-public school (not TJ)
-no crazy national/international awards
Just got super super lucky.

Stats and major?

1580, 4.6 weighted, Engineering

Very impressive, congrats to your DC on getting in for one of the toughest majors. Essays must have been excellent!

The sad thing is the assumption that a kid with these stats wouldn't normally get in without a hook. Back in the day they would have sailed in!

Test prep culture has considerably cheapened the value of a 1580.

No, 1580 is very hard to achieve prep or not.
Everybody should study and prepare hard for major test such as SAT, MCAT, BAR exam, Professional Engineer exam, etc.

Not a great comparison because the SAT is designed to determine kid’s ability to learn. The bar exam and professional engineering exams are to test what they have already learned.

I
-1 it's a great comparison because everyone is free to prepare.

It's like the Olympics where athletes train for 4 or more years. They are supposed to train - even if training gives them advantage. I don't know any elite athlete who simply shows up and expect to win the gold. Showong up and expect to take home the gold on the strength of the color of skin happens only at Harvard.

This illustrates the changed attitude toward the SAT since “back in the day.” I think it’s a terrible waste. The SAT used to measure aptitude. Now there’s no way to tell whether a 1540 was achieved cold or after months of intense study. That means it’s not a reliable measure of either effort or aptitude.

Sure it is. Just because someone studied for the SAT doesn't make them dumb. In fact it shows discipline and a willingness to learn, which are very good predictors for college success. Colleges all know this. There's a reason MIT went back to test mandatory. Test Optional was a fail. The kids accepted at MIT that went test optional could not perform at the same level as prior years. So MIT now requires SAT/ACT scores. Data is data. The schools that remain test optional are doing so simply to fatten up their applicant numbers or to hit their DEI targets. White and Asian kids from the burbs applying to competitive schools still need to take the SAT/ACT.

You die on the MIT hill if you want.

1800+ colleges are test optional, including HYPS, and most of the T50.

It's not going away.

What MIT going back to test requires tells me is that the MIT admissions staff are bad at their jobs. They really couldn’t figure it out?

You need data, more the data is better to more accurately figure out.

DP. My assumption is that MIT is pandering to the test fanatics. Given how frequently their decision is trotted out around here, I’d say that was a shrewd approach. We know from the other schools, eg Caltech, that SAT scores add minimal information to the student profile.

I think it's much simpler. The volume of applications to top schools has become untenable, and admissions offices need a way to weed out a large chunk. Given the extremely high number of UW 4.0GPAs, test scores can help with the weed-out.

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:High stat DC got into an Ivy this year.
-not a legacy
-not an athlete
-not an URM
-not a faculty kid
-public school (not TJ)
-no crazy national/international awards
Just got super super lucky.

Stats and major?

1580, 4.6 weighted, Engineering

Very impressive, congrats to your DC on getting in for one of the toughest majors. Essays must have been excellent!

The sad thing is the assumption that a kid with these stats wouldn't normally get in without a hook. Back in the day they would have sailed in!

Test prep culture has considerably cheapened the value of a 1580.

No, 1580 is very hard to achieve prep or not.
Everybody should study and prepare hard for major test such as SAT, MCAT, BAR exam, Professional Engineer exam, etc.

Not a great comparison because the SAT is designed to determine kid’s ability to learn. The bar exam and professional engineering exams are to test what they have already learned.

I
-1 it's a great comparison because everyone is free to prepare.

It's like the Olympics where athletes train for 4 or more years. They are supposed to train - even if training gives them advantage. I don't know any elite athlete who simply shows up and expect to win the gold. Showong up and expect to take home the gold on the strength of the color of skin happens only at Harvard.

This illustrates the changed attitude toward the SAT since “back in the day.” I think it’s a terrible waste. The SAT used to measure aptitude. Now there’s no way to tell whether a 1540 was achieved cold or after months of intense study. That means it’s not a reliable measure of either effort or aptitude.

Sure it is. Just because someone studied for the SAT doesn't make them dumb. In fact it shows discipline and a willingness to learn, which are very good predictors for college success. Colleges all know this. There's a reason MIT went back to test mandatory. Test Optional was a fail. The kids accepted at MIT that went test optional could not perform at the same level as prior years. So MIT now requires SAT/ACT scores. Data is data. The schools that remain test optional are doing so simply to fatten up their applicant numbers or to hit their DEI targets. White and Asian kids from the burbs applying to competitive schools still need to take the SAT/ACT.

You die on the MIT hill if you want.

1800+ colleges are test optional, including HYPS, and most of the T50.

It's not going away.

What MIT going back to test requires tells me is that the MIT admissions staff are bad at their jobs. They really couldn’t figure it out?

You need data, more the data is better to more accurately figure out.

Anonymous wrote:My DC has legacy at one of the HYP. We live in the suburbs in a state that is not underrepresented, are not high income, and I don’t donate. Applied SCEA and was deferred then rejected. Out of the 7 ivies applied to (didn’t apply to Cornell), my alma mater was the only one that rejected them. Even received 2 likely letters from other ivies. Ended up at their preferred HYP and couldn’t be happier.