For context, I’m currently low-income but not first-gen (meaning that I’m multi gen). 1 parent graduated with a BS from a commuter state school, whereas the other parent did not graduate high school.
Now, with that set aside, our school had a junior at an ivy (who is an alum of our high school) come in and give advice. He said that being 1st gen matters a lot, claiming that separate AOs read first gen and multi gen applications. This seems to be true; on this forum and elsewhere, I’ll see first-gen applicants get into top schools while having an app which is comparatively worse, whereas multi gen applicants will be nonprofit creators, etc. and still face rejection from top schools. I certainly understand why this happens, as first gen students have lower resources than their multi gen counterparts and thus must be judged at a considerably lower standard of review.
But being somebody who is multi gen but who is low income, I obviously don’t want to be compared or judged against the non profit creators or whatever of the college admissions world, considering that despite me being multi gen, I don’t have the equivalent access to the necessary resources or time to embark on such enormous and complex activities.
Thus, on my essay, would it be advantageous to write about being low-income and the challenges I faced (I had another essay topic in mind)? To what extent would this erase the heightened bar generated by being multi gen, if any? Or is being multi-gen not as big of a thing as I’m dramatizing it to be? For first gen students who “hav[e] an app which is comparatively worse,” are they able to get in to top colleges by virtue of them merely being first gen, or is it more because of their corresponding essays that emphasize the challenges/adversity they’ve faced as somebody who is less likely to have the connections and funds to succeed? Am I overthinking this?
Thank you for reading. Let me know your thoughts. Please be honest.