<p>My alma mater does a bit of what Pizzagirl stated.</p>
<p>Legacies have had priority applications (less essay); longer interview/info session concurrent with Homecoming; guarantee $ in the form of merit if accepted.</p>
<p>So basically, it is enticing to apply, but no guarantee of admit of that in the end you’d fare better in the entire financial pacakge.</p>
<p>
thus my evaluation that being a legacy does not equal “hook” in this case. Not disputing that there is an advantage; they tell us right off the bat that legacy applicants receive an extra reading of their app.</p>
<p>“Tip Factor” vs. “hook” :
Difference? Semantics?</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone has said that a legacy is a hook. It’s a factor that gets weighed in, as well as a multitude of other factors.</p>
<h1>37: “It’s not the hook that being a recruited athlete is, but it’s a hook. The lower ranked the college is the more of a hook it is.”</h1>
<p>Giving legacies guaranteed merit aid is one I’ve never heard. While I don’t think it’s just about the money, I think schools keep very detailed files on their alumni of note and do tend to favor very affluent legacies.</p>
<p>Archiemom, I think your lack of luck at ND may have lot to do with your CT location.</p>
<p>Don’t have facts right now to back this up, but I’m betting ND has more legacies as a percentage of applicants than many (most) other schools.</p>
<p>Supposedly legacy counts for something at Notre Dame, but not too much. My DW and is a Notre Dame alum - as is her brother. DW was a contributor to the book “Thanking Father Ted - Thirty-Five Years of Notre Dame Coeducation”. DS was a NMSF, multi-sport varsity athlete, who received very nice merit scholarship offers from Marquette, Miami (Ohio), Indiana and University of San Diego. Not even a courtsey waitlist at ND.</p>
<p>Needless to say DW is livid - no more ND flag hoisted on the porch on football Saturday, didn’t even enter the football ticket lottery, and has decreed “not one more ******* cent to that school”. No more ND as alternate beneficiary of the family trust in case none of the immediate family survive (worth $3 - 5 million depending on cause of death - shirttail relatives rejoice!)</p>
<p>What really set her off was receiving a “beg letter” the same day as DS got the thin envelope.</p>
<p>We know of a "legacy case " at Fordham who was not accepted. Mother also livid. His grades and test scores were very high but maybe there is something we don’t know.</p>
<p>Chicagobear, I had to laugh at your comment about the “beg” letter. I hear you, my son who is a 3rd generation legacy was eventually rejected by ND after sitting months and months on the WL. My husband(ND grad) won’t give them one red cent anymore (although they keep sending him ticket lottery apps and things for Sorin society members). My son was well qualified and full pay so go figure. Things work out though, he loves where he is so I am really not bitter (I went to SMC and my brothers are ND alum). Next year I will go through this process again as ND is on my daughter’s list. She’s been warned…</p>
<p>Legacy matters at least as much as expressing an enthusiastic interest in a school (visiting, emails, overnights, etc.).</p>
<p>No, because not all schools care about demonstrated interest. The ones highest on the totem pole know all their applicants are dying to go there.</p>
<p>So the little bit that I’ve gleaned here is that the evidence does not seem to support legacy being a hook. Why then does the perception persist that it is something more than a tipping factor, but less than a given?</p>
<p>Irishmary - likewise, DS absolutely loves Miami (Ohio) and is thriving there. I think the kids do better than the parents. </p>
<p>While I don’t know if legacy is a hook, developmental cases definitely are. DW’s brother is good friends with an ND developmental case - he didn’t have to write any essays. (This was obviously some time ago.)</p>
<p>“Also, just be aware that some school have a courtesy waitlist for legacy applicants. They have no intention of ever taking the legacy kids they put on this waitlist off of it.”</p>
<p>Not picking on you, but in general, can people please name the schools when they have inside info about policies that could be helpful to others?</p>
<p>college,</p>
<p>Simple answer because the college application asks if you are a legacy. This gives an illusion that if you answer “yes” you have an edge. For all anyone knows it is because they collect that data to be placed in their bright shiny brochures…X% are legacy. Again, to give an image and illusion for the reader to perceive on their own.</p>
<p>The other reason people feel this way is because they go on Chance me threads for particular schools, and the kids list in their stats that they are a legacy. This continues the image that it is a factor in the decision process.</p>
<p>I do agree, I think the majority of posters are stating that legacy typically means squat these days. Yrs ago, when the majority of Americans did not attend college, it was a hook, but those days are gone. Legacy now is used for last resort on the decision process. I.E. they have 1 spot left open for admissions, it is between a legacy child and a non legacy child, with all other factors being equal. The legacy child will probably get the spot. However, notice that is on the cusp student, not the one that was below the line drawn for acceptance.</p>
<p>You have more of a chance of getting in if you were 1/16 American Indian than being a legacy where the folks gave a 1K a yr for the least 20 yrs.</p>
<p>bullet, </p>
<p>Legacy means squat at many places because most kids get in. </p>
<p>Where admissions are highly competitive, at the elites, it means a lot. Just read a real academic study on elite college admissions. You don’t need to take my word for it. </p>
<p>And, if I recall correctly, at the true elites, the legacy bump is as great as the URM bump, so your American Indian comment, politically incorrect that the title is (ever hear of “native american”?), is incorrect for many of these places. </p>
<p>Myths, urban legends, anecdotes and confusion seem to abound on this topic. Not to mention the disinformation disseminated by adcoms. That’s why one needs to rely on those that have analyzed real admissions data. (We can’t get access to it, but some researchers have.)</p>
<p>Here is an interesting article, hot off the press, on this very issue:</p>
<p>[News:</a> Legacy of Bias - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/09/22/legacy]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/09/22/legacy)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because depending on the college it is a hook. The problem comes from misapplication of the data. Parents/applicants hear and see statistics that imply a boost to admissions chances and somehow jump to the conclusion that this translates into assured admission. A hook increases your chances, it doesn’t however guarantee admission. At the two presentations I sat in on both schools took great pains to point out that while the legacy-ED admit rate was 2-3X higher than RD they also reiterated that more than half of legacy-ED applicants were rejected. </p>
<p>Posters in this thread have given personal examples of qualified legacy students who were rejected by Duke, Davidson and others and interpreted those actions as evidence that legacy status is “worthless”. Yet I seriously doubt that any of the schools mentioned guaranteed admission to qualified legacy candidates; I suspect that at most they implied a higher probability, but certainly not a promise. </p>
<p>My interpretation of the data is that legacy status combined with ED gives the applicant an edge and depending on the school, that edge can be significant. I certainly don’t see how it hurts an applicant’s chances.</p>
<p>Top colleges reject lots of URMs, athletes, and even rich people. At the Ivies, at least, there will be some athletes who can’t get in, no matter how talented they may be. (I don’t know if there is some level of wealth that would cause even the dumbest person to be admitted everywhere.)</p>
<p>But even the hookiest hooks aren’t sure things.</p>