Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s unfair and everyone knows it.
If it hadn’t benefited your kid you would think so too. Legacy should end. But then again sadly there are so many other ways the system is rigged and not meritocratic no one should take it admission as such a big point of pride. I say this as a first gen Ivy grad.

Your kid should just say “yeah I had a bit of extra luck. “ and then just move on.

While that’s true, the kid was a dick.

The more appropriate response would be for him to roll his eyes. Or if the kid is routinely a dick say “suck it, loser”.

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:Well, the legacies I know who were rejected were more than qualified. One example: friends who are double legacy at Harvard, all three kids are at Yale instead because they didn't get into Harvard. All the legacies I know rejected from their parents school ended up at an equally elite school - so yes, those kids were qualified for the legacy school. I just don't think it's as easy as as "oh, she got in because of legacy, or she didn't get in because they didn't donate."

Legacy doesn't mean a guaranteed admit. Legacy does mean that the applicant is hooked, which is another way of saying the applicant is considered more favorably than those who lack a hook. Once you have the general stats for admission, would you rather be considered in the massive pile of applications where it is essentially a lottery OR would you rather be considered with a smaller pile of ones that are getting more time, a second look, more reasons for someone to champion your acceptance, etc?

The smaller pile, of course. I guess my point is that even in that smaller pile, it's competitive and not an easy admit. Lots of qualified legacies who are rejected and later end up at other HYPS.

Yes, enjoy arguing with yourself as no one is saying it’s easy to get into an elite university. They’re just saying it’s easier to get into an elite university as a legacy, which is not the same thing as it being easy

+1 Why is this confusing? I do not doubt that legacies who get in are generally worthy admits. I also don’t blame anyone for taking advantage of an opportunity available to them.

Just acknowledge it.

Why does anyone need to acknowledge it? Is this required for everyone? “I got in but I had a tutor for math in 9th grade, a private coach for track and my parents could afford to pay for a summer program so that’s why got accepted.” Everyone’s got some advantage over someone else - some are just better than others.

Why wouldn’t you acknowledge it when talking to people who didn’t get in? I’m honestly gobsmacked by this attitude. This would be the first thing I would say, but I really hate lording it over people.

Why do I have total confidence that you apply this only to legacies and not to of the advantages your kids have?

I don’t know? You can’t imagine what it’s like to be someone with humility and concern for other people?

And that’s the only way to show it? You don’t seem to have much concern for the kid by defending the rude ones.

Let me guess you expected minorities to say “yes I only got in because I’m a minority”

No.

Why not? Because it’s rude?

Underrepresented minorities deserve any leg up they get in admissions, and it is still not a level playing field. It is far easier to be a white applicant when you account for a lifetime of advantages.

But you knew that.

Anonymous wrote:My niece got into T10 school where she was a legacy. She confided that she had a niggling doubt she wouldn’t have gotten in without legacy. This apparently diminished her self confidence and might have impacted what how she performed later on in life.
This can have negative consequences for the person after the initial admission boost .
Self worth is a uuuuuuge thing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at my alma mater and while I know that being a legacy helped because the school does consider it, they were still a competitive applicant on their own with stats, ECs, etc. I am not an active alum and never donated any money either.
I’m assuming it tipped the scales in a small way, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if they had been rejected either, as many other legacy applicants were. I’m happy it worked out for them and glad I could help in that way. But for the average legacy you still need to be a very qualified applicant.

I know you really want to believe this, but this is not what the admissions statistics show. Many, many qualified applicants are not admitted. Legacy is one of the biggest boosts available in the admissions process.

Not anymore, some many high stat legacies deferred and then rejected over the past few cycles.

+1

It’s 2025. If you haven’t been paying attention, a lot has changed in college admissions over the last few years. “Legacy” isn’t nearly as powerful as some portray.

Do you have actual data to support this position?

Anonymous wrote:Op here. I was trying not to respond to this as I’m honestly hoping to let this thread die already. This will be my last post—but I did want to clarify—many people say I believe legacy had nothing to do with his admission—I never said that, I always said I’m sure it helped and I know it’s a factor. I’ve also updated a couple of times that I told ds he can acknowledge that he’s lucky/grateful, and he understood — we aren’t digging in and freaking out that legacy wasn’t a factor. I’ve always identified myself as the op, I’m not anonymously stirring the pot.

Some posters have said that they think I’m lying about donations to the university—it’s really been like $50/year when the alumni fund calls our house directly— we are still paying off education loans ourselves. We are not big donors and never have been. But if $50/year is more meaningful to the university than I thought, so be it.

It’s not an Ivy, but it is top 25. My spouse and I were both scholarship kids who took out a ton of loans back when students could take out a lot of loans. We had immigrant and blue collar parents. We were the lucky ones who were able to get in despite the odds, though of course it didn’t feel quite as hard back then. Our kids have much more privilege than we did, and they are still hard working and down to earth despite that. Anyway, I’m done—take what you will from what I said. I hate how fired up everyone gets over all of this. No wonder these kids are so stressed out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at my alma mater and while I know that being a legacy helped because the school does consider it, they were still a competitive applicant on their own with stats, ECs, etc. I am not an active alum and never donated any money either.
I’m assuming it tipped the scales in a small way, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if they had been rejected either, as many other legacy applicants were. I’m happy it worked out for them and glad I could help in that way. But for the average legacy you still need to be a very qualified applicant.

I know you really want to believe this, but this is not what the admissions statistics show. Many, many qualified applicants are not admitted. Legacy is one of the biggest boosts available in the admissions process.

Not anymore, some many high stat legacies deferred and then rejected over the past few cycles.

+1

It’s 2025. If you haven’t been paying attention, a lot has changed in college admissions over the last few years. “Legacy” isn’t nearly as powerful as some portray.

Do you have actual data to support this position?

Anonymous wrote:My niece got into T10 school where she was a legacy. She confided that she had a niggling doubt she wouldn’t have gotten in without legacy. This apparently diminished her self confidence and might have impacted what how she performed later on in life.
This can have negative consequences for the person after the initial admission boost .
Self worth is a uuuuuuge thing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at my alma mater and while I know that being a legacy helped because the school does consider it, they were still a competitive applicant on their own with stats, ECs, etc. I am not an active alum and never donated any money either.
I’m assuming it tipped the scales in a small way, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if they had been rejected either, as many other legacy applicants were. I’m happy it worked out for them and glad I could help in that way. But for the average legacy you still need to be a very qualified applicant.

I know you really want to believe this, but this is not what the admissions statistics show. Many, many qualified applicants are not admitted. Legacy is one of the biggest boosts available in the admissions process.

Not anymore, some many high stat legacies deferred and then rejected over the past few cycles.

+1

It’s 2025. If you haven’t been paying attention, a lot has changed in college admissions over the last few years. “Legacy” isn’t nearly as powerful as some portray.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at my alma mater and while I know that being a legacy helped because the school does consider it, they were still a competitive applicant on their own with stats, ECs, etc. I am not an active alum and never donated any money either.
I’m assuming it tipped the scales in a small way, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if they had been rejected either, as many other legacy applicants were. I’m happy it worked out for them and glad I could help in that way. But for the average legacy you still need to be a very qualified applicant.

I know you really want to believe this, but this is not what the admissions statistics show. Many, many qualified applicants are not admitted. Legacy is one of the biggest boosts available in the admissions process.

Not anymore, some many high stat legacies deferred and then rejected over the past few cycles.

Anonymous wrote:It’s unfair and everyone knows it.
If it hadn’t benefited your kid you would think so too. Legacy should end. But then again sadly there are so many other ways the system is rigged and not meritocratic no one should take it admission as such a big point of pride. I say this as a first gen Ivy grad.

Your kid should just say “yeah I had a bit of extra luck. “ and then just move on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only correct response, is " yeah I know I am lucky to have that added hook on my application. Thank you mom and dad!"

There's no reason to pretend it wasn't helpful or that your kid could have gotten in without your legacy status. It just makes you look small when you try to delude your friends. Your kid should just own that they had the advantage and are grateful and appreciative for it.

Even the historical numbers you rely on show that many legacy applicants could indeed get in without being a legacy, especially the more recent data. The same is not true of most other categories of hooks.

That is irrelevant to the fact that legacy is an extremely significant boost, one of the most powerful. The odds are that they would not have been accepted absent the legacy hook because that’s how the process works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the legacies I know who were rejected were more than qualified. One example: friends who are double legacy at Harvard, all three kids are at Yale instead because they didn't get into Harvard. All the legacies I know rejected from their parents school ended up at an equally elite school - so yes, those kids were qualified for the legacy school. I just don't think it's as easy as as "oh, she got in because of legacy, or she didn't get in because they didn't donate."

Legacy doesn't mean a guaranteed admit. Legacy does mean that the applicant is hooked, which is another way of saying the applicant is considered more favorably than those who lack a hook. Once you have the general stats for admission, would you rather be considered in the massive pile of applications where it is essentially a lottery OR would you rather be considered with a smaller pile of ones that are getting more time, a second look, more reasons for someone to champion your acceptance, etc?

The smaller pile, of course. I guess my point is that even in that smaller pile, it's competitive and not an easy admit. Lots of qualified legacies who are rejected and later end up at other HYPS.

Yes, enjoy arguing with yourself as no one is saying it’s easy to get into an elite university. They’re just saying it’s easier to get into an elite university as a legacy, which is not the same thing as it being easy

Sure legacies have an advantage in admissions - so in your mind that justifies other kids being rude about it? That’s an odd conclusion to reach

These kids were rude but in the scheme of things that kids that age can be rude about, my goodness. Are egos that fragile? Please recall that these kids are dealing with their own disappointment. Teach your children to be gracious about their victories.

The “rudeness” was pointing out that OP’s DC was a legacy meaning that they had odds in the 1 out of 3 or 4 range while the rejected kids faced 1 out of 100 odds. . .