You get more 'bang for your donor buck' at places like Carnegie Mellon that have a pitiful endowment compared to their peers.

Their grads don't have a great culture of giving so you stand out.

I wonder if it is the same at Georgetown.

Anonymous wrote:Being a legacy clearly helps, all of the data show it improves admission odds but not making it automatic by any sense. I don't think there are any data to suggest contributions matter, though it would seem to make sense that substantial contributions (naming rights) will likely help. It's a bad myth that people can buy their way into schools -- sometimes maybe but for the most part, no.

I've heard that it's not how much you contribute as a steady pattern of contributing every year, or volunteering for alumni events, because these indicate your loyalty and connection to the college. Donating a building or endowing a chair are going to get you a different kind of notice.

Being a legacy clearly helps, all of the data show it improves admission odds but not making it automatic by any sense. I don't think there are any data to suggest contributions matter, though it would seem to make sense that substantial contributions (naming rights) will likely help. It's a bad myth that people can buy their way into schools -- sometimes maybe but for the most part, no.

The head of development speaks to the head of admissions only when the check has 6 zeroes reading right to left.

A building. At least at my school.

I have donated regularly in ever-increasing (small) amounts since I graduated because I am loyal to my college. I have interviewed potential applicants since the first application season after I graduated and I have done fundraising among my classmates for the last 4 years and will continue to do so, regardless of how much I hate that part because I really love my college.

Do I think any of that will help my kid in 16 years? Only if she is qualified of her own accord and they are deciding between her and another equally qualified student, I would think it would be a tie-breaker, much like the required alumni interview is generally used as a tie-breaker in deciding between two similarly situated students.

The opposite seems to be true; you can be outright rejected if you are the student of an alumnus who has never, ever given money to the alma mater.

My sister was accepted literally everywhere she applied (Notre Dame, William & Mary, Virginia, Cornell) except for our dad's alma mater, Georgetown.

I think high five figures for high profile schools just to get on the radar, and then they want more from where that came from but if you just want to get noticed, min. I would say, 50K.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - can none of your kids achieve anything on their own merits?

Harvard apparently accepts 30% of legacies vs 6% of regular applicants

So, basically, your kids can't get in because you couldn't.

I've never been so glad my parents went to Cal State and never donated a dime to any school. At least I know I got in on my own.

Anonymous wrote:My father went to and was a prof at Harvard but I wasn't allowed to apply there because the spots were given to other girls. I went to NCS in the 90's.

But your dad wasn't a prof at the time you were at NCS, unless your parents were divorced?

My father went to and was a prof at Harvard but I wasn't allowed to apply there because the spots were given to other girls. I went to NCS in the 90's.