<p>I want undergrad admission into Stanford and my brother-in-law did his masters and Phd from Stanford. Would that give me a legacy consideration? Also can I in any way use my brother in law’s alumni status to help my admission like getting a rec from some Stanford professor?</p>
<p>I don’t know about the legacy issue, but I don’t believe legacy is considered until the third round in the admissions process (basically the end).</p>
<p>As for the recommendation, i you don’t know the professor, the value of the rec is dubious. Adcoms are looking for recommendations from teachers who know and respect you, and can give them a good idea of who you are. Having a recommendation from a person of notoriety, but who you do not know, fails to give them this impression.</p>
<p>Actually the recommendation is useless anyways. Colleges only care about professors who have taught the students. Even if they know the students it doesn’t help. Colleges care about the 2 teacher’s recommendation and 1 counselor recommendations. They have to read through thousands of apps and it would be time consuming to read recommendations from people who don’t know how the student learns in schools or how the student work with their peers. </p>
<p>Having recommendations from people who haven’t really taught you, from people who don’t know how you do in school, and from somebody that has connections with the school but has never taught you can give the impression that you are desperate.</p>
<p>I doubt a brother in law would give a legacy advantage. It would be better if it were your sister and she had gone there as an undergraduate.</p>
<p>Wow. YOu have no legacies whatsoever. Legacies doesn’t really help anyways. Unless you’re Bing family or Arrillaga family</p>
<p>All one has to do to get answers to these simple questions is to look at the application itself. It will ask if you have legacy status in various areas. I haven’t seen one yet that asks for “in-law” legacy status but then, I haven’t looked at more than 10 or so applications, so there could be one out there … but I doubt it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not true. Among well-qualified applicants, legacies seem to get in more often than unhooked applicants. The published rate is 2x the acceptance rate for legacies than everyone else. Factor in that everyone else includes URMs and athletes, legacies probably have a 3x advantage over unhooks. But then factor in that legacy pool as a whole is probably more qualified, then it goes back down to around 2x the advantage. Just estimates. Certainly nothing to get an otherwise mediocre candidate in. Just increases the odds for qualified candidates. Which does have a noticeable effect, especially for those borderline legacies admitted. </p>
<p>I’d take URM over legacy, though. I don’t know about first-gen. </p>
<p>Just my 2 cents.</p>
<p>Does an international URM have an advantage over an unhooked domestic applicant?</p>
<p>how much advantage does a half mexican legacy have over an unhooked applicant?</p>