Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

That is an enormous advantage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Can you read? The poster literally wrote “ Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost?” You think they’d say that if they didn’t know it granted an advantage?

Can you? I said “people shouldn’t pretend,” not PP in particular, since there are plenty of people trying to downplay it here.

Then there’s you, just flying off the handle at everyone on this thread like a completely unhinged nutcase. All the legacy preferences in the world can’t make you a normal person.

PP is part of “people”. That’s how the word works.

Maybe I’m not normal in your eyes but I also don’t try to make other kids ashamed because I failed my own kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t he be gracious and say something to acknowledge that legacy may have helped? He can shrug and say, “Yeah, I’m sure it helped, even if it’s not enough by itself without the other stuff like grades, etc.”

Congrats to your son, and please realize it’s spur grapes from students who aren’t lucky enough to have a non-merit-based small thumb on the scale. The system isn’t fair and that is what it is. Your son can be kind in this scenario and not take it personally.

Why should he be gracious here? They haven’t done anything that deserves grace.

I’d tell my kid to tell them to F off. That’s the response that comment deserves. Preferably while wearing the sweatshirt of the college that rejected them.

Do you always teach your kid to lie?

How is telling them to F off a lie?

Fine I would tell them to say “yes I got in because my parents were legacies. If your parents weren’t stupid they could have attended the school too and then you would have been a legacy. Sucks for you.”

You want these kids to wear a hairshirt because they had a legacy tip. You telling your kid to wear one because you’re well off?

Your defensiveness is telling. Frankly there is simply too much data out about how much preference legacies get. You can’t lie to the world any more, and you are angry about that. But you refuse to tell your child the truth about his significant admissions preference, and so prefer to teach him to go though life deeply entitled.

Defensiveness? Are you literate? I literally wrote they should say “yes I got in because my parents were legacies”

In fact I would tell them to apply because they have a better shot because they’re legacy even if it isn’t their first choice. And then after they get in I tell them to apply wherever else they want to go instead. I’m sorry you don’t have anything similar to offer your kid. Maybe you should have been more of a striver in high school. Sometimes the consequences of your laziness don’t appear for years I guess.

In any event, I think you’re misreading it because you refuse to believe that some people are perfectly comfortable owing their situation and don’t feel any shame in it. It’s really a simple calculation - their chance of getting in at my alma mater is 5-6x better than elsewhere so it’s an easy call.

I’m not going to feel the need to tell my kids to spare some kid’s feelings who is being a jerk no matter how much you want our kids to beat themselves up over it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Can you read? The poster literally wrote “ Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost?” You think they’d say that if they didn’t know it granted an advantage?

Can you? I said “people shouldn’t pretend,” not PP in particular, since there are plenty of people trying to downplay it here.

Then there’s you, just flying off the handle at everyone on this thread like a completely unhinged nutcase. All the legacy preferences in the world can’t make you a normal person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Can you read? The poster literally wrote “ Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost?” You think they’d say that if they didn’t know it granted an advantage?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are we protecting here? Sounds like it’s the kid who thought they had a competitive application but didn’t get admitted to an elite school. So, OP’s kid has to console them by suggesting that legacy tipped the scales for him? Wouldn’t that make the fragile kids even more resentful? I guess it’s a cope to “blame”the legacy parents. So stupid.

This. If they’re friends, call them on their BS. A friend would be happy for you and even if they made a snide remark because of jealousy, they would know it if you called them on it. Don’t apologize for success to this passive aggressive nonsense.

Since when is being aware of reality passive aggressive? It is not passive aggressive to recognize the reality of legacy preferences. It is simply fact.

Honestly I sometimes think legacy preference should go away only because the people who want it are so insufferable. You cannot demand that everyone pretend legacies don’t have an enormous advantage in admissions when there is so much hard data showing just how much advantage they get. You people sound like you would demand everyone in the world pretend the sky isn’t blue if understanding the sky is in fact blue would hurt your child’s feelings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

That is an enormous advantage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t he be gracious and say something to acknowledge that legacy may have helped? He can shrug and say, “Yeah, I’m sure it helped, even if it’s not enough by itself without the other stuff like grades, etc.”

Congrats to your son, and please realize it’s spur grapes from students who aren’t lucky enough to have a non-merit-based small thumb on the scale. The system isn’t fair and that is what it is. Your son can be kind in this scenario and not take it personally.

Why should he be gracious here? They haven’t done anything that deserves grace.

I’d tell my kid to tell them to F off. That’s the response that comment deserves. Preferably while wearing the sweatshirt of the college that rejected them.

Do you always teach your kid to lie?

How is telling them to F off a lie?

Fine I would tell them to say “yes I got in because my parents were legacies. If your parents weren’t stupid they could have attended the school too and then you would have been a legacy. Sucks for you.”

You want these kids to wear a hairshirt because they had a legacy tip. You telling your kid to wear one because you’re well off?

Your defensiveness is telling. Frankly there is simply too much data out about how much preference legacies get. You can’t lie to the world any more, and you are angry about that. But you refuse to tell your child the truth about his significant admissions preference, and so prefer to teach him to go though life deeply entitled.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Sure - if you dig deep, it's about twice the advantage. So from 8 to 16% at a Williams or Swat for example, and more if you apply ED.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are we protecting here? Sounds like it’s the kid who thought they had a competitive application but didn’t get admitted to an elite school. So, OP’s kid has to console them by suggesting that legacy tipped the scales for him? Wouldn’t that make the fragile kids even more resentful? I guess it’s a cope to “blame”the legacy parents. So stupid.

This. If they’re friends, call them on their BS. A friend would be happy for you and even if they made a snide remark because of jealousy, they would know it if you called them on it. Don’t apologize for success to this passive aggressive nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea and agree it’s rational. But people shouldn’t pretend that it doesn’t grant a huge advantage, either.

Anonymous wrote:In the world of insanely competitive admissions, it is only rational to choose to apply where one's parents attended if a kid wants to go to a really selective school and is otherwise qualified and loves the school. Our kid was just accepted ED at my alma mater (Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore) and is not an athlete but otherwise had the grades, scores, great EC's, etc. - but yes, these schools are near impossible admits. Why wouldn't they have chosen to apply to the one I attended for the legacy boost? We are ignoring the few smarmy legacy comments because who cares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t he be gracious and say something to acknowledge that legacy may have helped? He can shrug and say, “Yeah, I’m sure it helped, even if it’s not enough by itself without the other stuff like grades, etc.”

Congrats to your son, and please realize it’s spur grapes from students who aren’t lucky enough to have a non-merit-based small thumb on the scale. The system isn’t fair and that is what it is. Your son can be kind in this scenario and not take it personally.

Why should he be gracious here? They haven’t done anything that deserves grace.

I’d tell my kid to tell them to F off. That’s the response that comment deserves. Preferably while wearing the sweatshirt of the college that rejected them.

Do you always teach your kid to lie?

How is telling them to F off a lie?

Fine I would tell them to say “yes I got in because my parents were legacies. If your parents weren’t stupid they could have attended the school too and then you would have been a legacy. Sucks for you.”

You want these kids to wear a hairshirt because they had a legacy tip. You telling your kid to wear one because you’re well off?