Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First time that I have seen real data on the subject, rather than just rampant conjecture:

http://features.thecrimson.com/2014/freshman-survey/admissions/

Very interesting.

That's not real data; that's self reported survey data.

+1000

What is real is that Harvard openly acknowledges that legacies are given an advantage. You can argue all you want about what kind of advantage and how big an advantage, but it is ridiculous to suggest that legacies are not given an advantage, or that some how they are at a disadvantage.

Anonymous wrote:First time that I have seen real data on the subject, rather than just rampant conjecture:

http://features.thecrimson.com/2014/freshman-survey/admissions/

Very interesting.

That's not real data; that's self reported survey data.

From where I sit, it feels inevitable that legacies would be better qualified than other applicants. Smart people with lots of privilege (social, intellectual and financial capital) tend to do well at magnifying those advantages for their children.

30 years ago, I was a middle-class student at an Ivy. Though I had near perfect test scores and GPA, and I took every AP offered in my FCPS school, there is no way I was as prepared for college as most of my classmates. In contrast, my DC has received every possible advantage. She was raised with the habits of mind that I copied from others. Because of all the privilege she enjoys, she goes to a Big 3, she's interned in places that most college students would envy, and she has a deeper, more intellectual understanding of the world. My alma mater would be lucky if she wants to go there. At the same time, she would be just as successful in life if she goes to a less prestigious college.

If an Ivy League school's goal was merely to produce the next generations of leaders, legacies like my daughter would probably be even more disproportionately represented. To the extent they want to create access to the top and social mobility for the middle/bottom, then they have to admit more people like me - strivers who start a little less prepared and need to run fast to keep up. It is a continual balancing act and a never ending challenge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

Citation, please?

Go to the beginning of the thread and click on the link. See SAT by Legacy Status.

Most applicants to Harvard have great SAT scores. The legacy advantage is that you lead little more than top grades and top SAT scores to get in. Non-legacies need exceptional accomplishments in addition to great test scores and a great gpa. Isn't this common knowledge?

Also, note that only 70% of the class responded. Surely less qualified, hooked students would be less likely to want to participate in a survey like this. This data isn't reliable.

Really, you think that the sign of the legacy versus non-legacy result would switch if they captured data on the other 30%? You are reaching, my friend. So you think that the majority of the legacy candidates are nothing more than cardboard cutouts with high grades and SAT scores? Dream on!

The point is, neither you nor I know. We can only guess. Or at least I can. You are omniscient.

Sorry your narrative has hit a snag. Your statements that legacies need no more than top grades is ridiculous, wrong, and mean spirited. Grow up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

Citation, please?

Go to the beginning of the thread and click on the link. See SAT by Legacy Status.

Most applicants to Harvard have great SAT scores. The legacy advantage is that you lead little more than top grades and top SAT scores to get in. Non-legacies need exceptional accomplishments in addition to great test scores and a great gpa. Isn't this common knowledge?

Also, note that only 70% of the class responded. Surely less qualified, hooked students would be less likely to want to participate in a survey like this. This data isn't reliable.

Sorry that your common knowledge isn't supported by the facts.

Which facts are you referring to?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

Citation, please?

Go to the beginning of the thread and click on the link. See SAT by Legacy Status.

Most applicants to Harvard have great SAT scores. The legacy advantage is that you lead little more than top grades and top SAT scores to get in. Non-legacies need exceptional accomplishments in addition to great test scores and a great gpa. Isn't this common knowledge?

Also, note that only 70% of the class responded. Surely less qualified, hooked students would be less likely to want to participate in a survey like this. This data isn't reliable.

Really, you think that the sign of the legacy versus non-legacy result would switch if they captured data on the other 30%? You are reaching, my friend. So you think that the majority of the legacy candidates are nothing more than cardboard cutouts with high grades and SAT scores? Dream on!

The point is, neither you nor I know. We can only guess. Or at least I can. You are omniscient.

Anonymous wrote:My simple takeaway on the subject is that the next time I instinctively state that so and so got into Harvard only because his/her parents went there, I probably only know a small part of the story, and I am more likely than not sticking my foot in my mouth.

But the shorthand is easier and I feel much better about myself, knowing that the world isn't fair.

My simple takeaway on the subject is that the next time I instinctively state that so and so got into Harvard only because his/her parents went there, I probably only know a small part of the story, and I am more likely than not sticking my foot in my mouth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

50 points in the 2200 range is not statistically significant. It's a difference of a third of a percentile or something. Plus there's some variability in the sampling distribution. My guess is the SAT scores are about the same. They don't lower their standards for legacies, they're just more likely to admit the legacy vs the non-legacy, assuming everything else is equal.

My statistics are a bit rusty. With 200 in the treatment group and 1400 in the control, 60 points might meet the threshold of significance. Math help?

qualified students. (Oops on submitting too soon.)

Legacies are a tie-breaker. There are many, many

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

50 points in the 2200 range is not statistically significant. It's a difference of a third of a percentile or something. Plus there's some variability in the sampling distribution. My guess is the SAT scores are about the same. They don't lower their standards for legacies, they're just more likely to admit the legacy vs the non-legacy, assuming everything else is equal.

Anonymous wrote:Which Ivies aren't selective?

No objective definition of "selective", so you get to decide for yourself. One man's mountain is another man's molehill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

Citation, please?

Go to the beginning of the thread and click on the link. See SAT by Legacy Status.

Most applicants to Harvard have great SAT scores. The legacy advantage is that you lead little more than top grades and top SAT scores to get in. Non-legacies need exceptional accomplishments in addition to great test scores and a great gpa. Isn't this common knowledge?

Also, note that only 70% of the class responded. Surely less qualified, hooked students would be less likely to want to participate in a survey like this. This data isn't reliable.

Sorry that your common knowledge isn't supported by the facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you linked to is not helpful.

Here:

Seventy-four percent of respondents who reported having at least one parent who attended the College said that they were accepted early to Harvard. By comparison, 56 percent of all respondents said they were admitted early.

Not helpful only if you want to ignore facts. Legacy admits had on average 50 point higher SATs. Where is the lowering of the bar that everyone refers to?

Citation, please?

Go to the beginning of the thread and click on the link. See SAT by Legacy Status.

Most applicants to Harvard have great SAT scores. The legacy advantage is that you lead little more than top grades and top SAT scores to get in. Non-legacies need exceptional accomplishments in addition to great test scores and a great gpa. Isn't this common knowledge?

Also, note that only 70% of the class responded. Surely less qualified, hooked students would be less likely to want to participate in a survey like this. This data isn't reliable.

Really, you think that the sign of the legacy versus non-legacy result would switch if they captured data on the other 30%? You are reaching, my friend. So you think that the majority of the legacy candidates are nothing more than cardboard cutouts with high grades and SAT scores? Dream on!