<p>NMD,</p>
<p>Goulden’s book is specifically about the Ivies. Yes, it focuses on “development preferences”, but also clearly identifies children of faculty as the recipients of unearned benefits and preferential treatment. Unless you consider the Ivies to be unrepresentative of “highly selective universities”, I would say that this provides “some evidence”.</p>
<p>It seems that we have engaged in a similar discussion before
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/398314-one-my-parents-work-university-chicago.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/398314-one-my-parents-work-university-chicago.html</a></p>
<p>Your position appears to have shifted since last time, when you stated “FWIW, there aren’t too many schools left that give a boost to staff kids”. Now you have backpedaled to limit that to “highly selective universities”, whatever that means. If being the child of a faculty member offers “no advantage,” and since you claim to be on the inside of the process, please explain why highly selective universities explicitly ask this question? Chicago’s links to the paper application appear to be broken so I cannot verify, but Columbia (the most selective school in the land) certainly asks “Is either parent a full-time employee of Columbia?” (bottom of the first white page)
<a href=“http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/applications/pdf/firstyearapp.pdf[/url]”>http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/applications/pdf/firstyearapp.pdf</a></p>
<p>Your response to the limited facts and figures I have provided has been “it ain’t so”, but you have offered no evidence to the contrary. You can choose to believe what you choose to believe, but I suspect that the readers of this board are getting tired of our back and forth. Go ahead and put in the last word with another rebuttal, and we then each go our ways.</p>