My child is torn between these two for their early application. They are a legacy at Stanford through a non-custodial parent that they no longer speak to due to family issues. Would that legacy tie still provide an advantage at Stanford? Would the boost only apply to the REA round? They like both schools equally.
At Stanford, “legacy” applicants are defined as the children of Stanford graduates at either the undergraduate or graduate level. It doesn’t matter whether the parent is custodial or non-custodial, living or deceased.
It doesn’t matter whether the applicant applies during EA or RD. The legacy boost should be the same. Any potential EA boost is an additional, separate boost.
https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2020/06/admissions-considerations-for-children-of-alumni-or-donors
1 Like
Thank you!
1 Like
Brown says this:
“Please do not assume that your admission chances are improved by applying under the Early Decision plan. The Board of Admission makes the same decisions under Early Decision that it would under the Regular Decision plan.”
I suppose you could go Stanford as it’s not binding and Brown RD to give optionality because if you go Brown ED and get in, Stanford is off the table.
2 Likes
Stanford doesn’t directly address a legacy boost difference between REA and RD. But applying REA signals that Stanford is an applicant’s top choice. Applying RD signals that the applicant likely applied elsewhere in ED or restricted/single choice EA.
Note that if applying for financial aid, both Brown and Stanford require NCP financial information. If that is not possible, you will need to submit an NCP waiver at each school that requires NCP info, and I would encourage you to do that as your kid submits their app.
5 Likes
Apply Stanford REA. Yes ED will boost a little at Brown (even if they say it won’t) but not more than REA/legacy combo at Stanford, and yes the legacy boost will still apply in your child’s situation. If child likes both schools equally, they should maximize potential choice and go with the nonbinding option. Only reason to ED Brown in this scenario would be a clear #1 preference for Brown.
5 Likes
If your child likes both schools equally, I suggest that s/he take a closer look. These are 2 very different schools. At Stanford, about a third of the courses needed to graduate are accomplished through Stanford’s general education requirements. In sharp contrast, the only requirement at Brown is demonstrated writing competency. That’s it. Brown’s curriculum choices are wide open with every course being self-selected by the student with the help of a faculty advisor. Brown also offers a pass/fail option to encourage risk taking.
This difference in course selection creates an enormous difference on what the 4 year academic experience will be. Then there is the question of major. Stanford’s strengths are in tech & engineering and are regarded as a feeder to Silicon Valley. Brown’s strengths are in Arts & Sciences. Again, a significantly different profile. What are your child’s interest areas? Do they align more with one school’s strengths than the other?
My suggestion is that your child look closely at what his/her plan of study might look like at both schools and decide which one s/he prefers. Given the differences between the two, this shouldn’t be hard. S/he can then focus on ED or REA on the preferred school.
I should add that being a legacy is a significant assist to admissions at Stanford. One of every 7 students at Stanford is a legacy. But keep in mind that Stanford is insanely selective at 3% and their yield is super high, i.e. applicants who are accepted there, choose to go there. Brown is also highly selective at 5% and their yield is high although not as high as Stanford’s. As a result, Brown accepted 500 more students last year than Stanford did even though Stanford is the bigger school and increased the size of their freshman class last year. So, even with a Stanford legacy advantage, admissions are very unpredictable there.
9 Likes
The stats would certainly indicate that - 16%! - , yet they tell alums (in publications, on tours at reunions, etc.) that all legacy gets you is a second read UNLESS you are a major donor. Based on my network, that would seem to be true – very qualified legacy kids not being admitted to Stanford but matriculating at an Ivy - so not really sure how to reconcile that. It is interesting to note that many of the athletes are also legacies. Wondering if part of it is that there are so many alums given that graduating from any program confers legacy status for undergrad.
Just saying that OP should not be mislead into thinking there is a huge advantage there. If there could be, there is someone in the development office who can advise them of how to best present themselves.
2 Likes
I would add on that Brown does have specific course requirements for each of its concentrations (majors) — so not quite as unstructured as it might seem at first glance. And some courses are restricted to freshmen or require prerequisites or are capped as to the number of students that can be accommodated.
3 Likes
Of course. 
I know it seems obvious, but in the past I was helping a parent of a Brown student whose student (and the parent ) did not understand this and were quite upset that the student couldn’t take any class they wanted because of prerequisites and class size limitations. This was a student who was already enrolled at Brown and had chosen it because they thought there was no class that was not available at all times.
5 Likes
These are such different schools. Where do “they” want to go. Seriously. Pick that one.
4 Likes
Are these course requirements mandatory at a high school level so for example does a Psychology major have to take AP Psyc in school. I know it is definitely preferable to align high school courses with a major one is apply to (if possible) but is there more than that at Brown
I don’t know it’s preferable that a psych major has taken AP Psych. I’m guessing classes for some majors are preferred. For example, math and sciences for STEM or CS but while it’d be schoool by school, I’m guessing AP CS wouldn’t impact CS admissions in many/most places no would AP English courses be required for an English major.
I’d think pre reqs if you will would matter but not a specific elective tied to a major although it impacts overall rigor.
But only adcoms at ea h school could truly answer.
1 Like
No, pre-major courses are not mandatory or even really considered. This is why you get two years to declare a major – nothing is set in stone, including the majors in which you express interest in your application. Brown wants to see that you’re challenging yourself with core subjects (ideally taking the most challenging courses available to you in most subjects). They should be reasonably clear about the expectations for how many years you’ve spent in HS in each area (for highly selective schools, you’ll want to meet or ideally exceed recommendations if possible – four years in every core, and getting to or beyond the 4th-year equivalent in a language). I suppose that if you say you’re interested in STEM, they’ll want to see evidence of high achievement in those areas, etc. But no one expects you to have taken AP Psych if you’re interested in a Psych major. There’s plenty of time to take the intro psych course in college to explore that discipline. The point of HS is to establish a broad foundation for achievement after HS, not to prepare for a specific college major.
3 Likes
Introductory psychology in colleges generally list no prerequisites, unlike frosh level courses in some other subjects:
- General chemistry: high school chemistry
- Physics for physics majors: calculus and high school physics
- Calculus: precalculus, often assessed by math placement test
- English composition: often based on placement test
Taking AP psychology in high school may give the student opportunity to determine interest or lack thereof in the subject. The same goes for some other academic electives in high school (e.g. CS, various arts, economics, environmental science, statistics, etc.).
2 Likes
No, not preferable. Alignment is neither necessary or desirable. What IS necessary is showing rigor, covering off the major academic areas (Brown will not be impressed if a kid skips foreign language to double-down on differential equations or microbiology), and taking advantage of the opportunities at the kid’s particular HS (which is not a uniform construct in the US since there is no national curriculum).
4 Likes
If they’re not 100% sold on Brown, I would avoid applying ED to Brown – because if they are admitted, they’re locked in.
The safer route – in terms of preserving options – is to go Stanford REA and Brown RD, as Stanford’s REA is not binding.
Do they have other options in mind that are like Brown and Stanford, but maybe not as hard to get into? (matches and at least one safety)
1 Like
This is a little misleading. Stanford does have a series of distribution requirements, but many of them are met by classes within a major, or that a student might choose to take anyway. If you assume the student will take 48 classes in their time at Stanford (12 quarters x 4 classes/quarter), there are 2 required “introductory” courses, 2 writing courses (selected from a variety of options), and 0-3 language courses (depending on whether the student tests out) - well less than a third. Likely some of the other requirements will require taking some non-major classes, but there is a very wide selection. Stanford also offers Pass/Fail options for most courses.
I’d also say this is misleading (or reductive), especially for Stanford, which has one of the top political science/public policy programs in the world, some of the leading natural science departments, and strength in many other areas. While more Stanford graduates end up in Silicon Valley than probably any other school (maybe not Berkeley), the significant majority of Stanford graduates are not working at Silicon Valley tech startups/firms. Brown has some pockets of engineering that are well-regarded as well.
5 Likes
Agree with the take that there’s plenty of Stanford grads who don’t work in tech. I was raised in the Silicon Valley, I live in the North Bay now, and, as it happens, none of the Stanford grads I have known, from high school through to today, have worked in tech. Politics, journalism, business, nonprofit work, a wide variety of things… not tech.
I do think there’s a start up/tech culture but everyone I know found their people.
1 Like