@blossom well, my point more is for kids not to be trapped by the “legacy” hook. It’s a “lucky kid’s problem” but I have noticed a certain amount of social/school pressure on these kids to “use” the legacy “in” for Ivy or other top-level schools. When some kids don’t there’s a kind of… “B-but, it’s an Ivy! You’ll probably get in!”
I know more than one kid who applied to their parent’s Alma Mater seemingly just to not lose out on the “hook.”
@CaliDad2020 I hate this talk of how “legacy” status makes admission easier because for all those legacies who are not admitted–and most aren’t–it is a doubly crushing blow. I’m certain there are many parents out there who have had to console their child when they did not get into their parents’ alma mater.
@exlibris97 sure, although the same can be said of any kid with an acknowledged “hook” (whether 1st gen, top athlete, URM or perfect boards) - really the biggest problem is parents (tho most of us won’t admit it.) By focusing on things like “Ivies” (which is always so silly, Dartmouth is more like Williams or Middlebury than Penn, which is more like Boston U or Brown than Cornell, which is more like…) we do our kids a huge disservice and I think some of them end up chasing a school 'cause they think they have a “hook” (I especially see it with athletes, actually - choosing a school by where they are recruited) rather than choosing the education they want and finding a variety of places they can get it.
But that’s OT anyway. Just the existence of topics like this (and all of our, including my, participation) shows that the “brand” chasing is not going away any time soon. And it’s a “problem” of the ridiculously lucky anyway. Most kids out there are just trying to figure out if they can afford Cal State or need to do community college for 4 years.
Because of this:
This is certainly extreme hyperbole:
Not being offered admission at one particular school is no “tragedy.” Add to the fact that the student in question doesn’t even want to go there, it’s really a non-issue.
@Nrdsb4 It is a tragedy in the sense that class rank is an almost totally irrelevant number since high schools differ dramatically, as do weighting policies. Something can be “tragic” even if it doesn’t directly affect the individual concerned.
One thing I’ve learned is that weighting systems are almost impossible to do in a way that is truly fair. I actually think the 10% rule was a pretty clever way to get the kids with every disadvantage in life a leg up.
States could require public schools to use the same weighting system across the state. While that doesn’t account for the difference in schools, it would eliminate silliness like schools that don’t give some kind of boost for more advanced courses, or that penalize you for taking art courses on top of a full schedule.
We were directly affected.
My kids went to a non ranking private school. The oldest, who got into some pretty elite schools, would have had to jump through some hoops to attend. So she ended up committing to Vanderbilt, and changed her mind at the last minute to attend UNC-CH. UT is my alma mater, so it was annoying. Not tragic.
Tragedy is death, or life changing illness, your house burning down, being paralyzed in an accident. Not getting into any one school is never a tragedy. There are thousands of great schools in the US. There is nothing so special about UT that you can’t get at any number of schools in Texas if you are willing and able.
Look, the admission process is either fair - for everyone - and merit based. Or some pigs are more equal that the others. It looks like in USA, the absolute majority of parents prefer holistic approach. Fine. If some pigs are more equal, than we will endlessly discuss which pigs have priority over the others. I, personally is for “equal for everyone” approach.
Speaking of the USA, how awesome is it that every kid who can at least get B’s in HS and score near the 50th percentile on standardized tests will have tons of college options? And even better, unless they are set on IB or MBB consulting, it really doesn’t matter where they go to school.
But “merit” is subjective. Not everyone and not every school defines merit simply by test scores and grades. There is plenty of “merit” to be found in other areas.
Colleges do things in their own self-interest. Period.
Honestly? Donation does help school. I don’t have a problem with that. After all, the family does give something to the school.
@Nrdsb4 You wrote, “Tragedy is death, or life changing illness, your house burning down, being paralyzed in an accident. Not getting into any one school is never a tragedy”. First of all, you don’t seem to have a thorough understanding of the meaning of the word “tragic”. It has a different meaning than “tragedy”. But even tragedy is not limited to horrible circumstances, as you are implying. As an English major, we had an entire course on “tragic literature”. Not one of the books was about war, death, pestilence etc.
What I said, and stand by, is the misuse of class rank. But I also disagree that going to a school that does not use class rank means you must jump through additional hoops. When I was a junior admissions officer, many students from independent schools were not ranked. None were at a disadvantage.
@exlibris, my very high stats kid from one of the top ranked prep schools in the nation, much less from our state, would have had to go to UT as a summer school student in order to get into UT from her school that didn’t rank. It was absurd. She got into other schools ranked much higher than UT with no stipulations whatsoever, so YES, in our case, being at a school that didn’t rank was a disadvantage if she had had her heart set on doing anything in the summer that didn’t include going straight from a vigorous program to college without even so much as a week off.
D2, from the same prep school, would have had to go to another UT school for a year first in order to get into UT. It was annoying, but no tragedy.
By the way, you are the one who used the word “tragedy” vs. “tragic,” not that I agree with your assertion below.
And I stand by my statement that not getting into any particular university is no “tragedy.” Nor is it “tragic” for that matter. 
It’s just simply not. Not with the number of great schools in this country. Any kid of merit can find a good fit at any number of amazing schools-their future is not ruined by not getting into any single school.
@californiaaa except, of course, “fair” “merit-based” admissions is a pixie-dust unicorn: it just don’t exist in this world of ours.
I did propose to a UC administrator a system that would be way “more” fair:
A lottery for UC spots. Determine a minimum “UC Number” that is some computation based on GPA, Rigor, SAT/ACT that shows a consistent ability to thrive at a UC.
Anyone over that number goes in a pool. Each student gets a random number. And then we go down the number and these kids get to pick. #1 picks Econ at UCB, #2 picks EE at UCLA, #3 picks Pre-Med at UCSD… etc.
That way it is simply: Are you (statistically) likely to cut the mustard and then the luck of the draw.
I have to say the UC admin I suggested it too was less than impressed, although they did admit it was merit based and would save the admissions offices a lot of money and man-hours…
There are always people who feel someone else got an unfair advantage. A short list of those who get blamed:
URMs
Athletes
Legacies
Development
Full Pay kids
Am I missing anyone?
@HRSMom also: first-gens, celebrity kids, kids from square states, faculty brats, anyone who isn’t your kid.
^LOL!!!
I think “anyone who is not my kid” is the correct answer.
I do laugh when my friends back east tell me how lucky my kids are to come from square state Colorado. Usually coming from folks who’ve very successfully played the athlete and legacy cards.
My experience is that geography means nothing – there’s no shortage of 35 ACT 4.0 GPA kids coming from the suburbs around Denver, Phoenix, etc.
But I have heard that all the kids from Fargo do get in!
I have a niece and a nephew (not siblings, cousins) who were applying to colleges at the same time. Niece was very involved in high school, a cheerleader, female athlete of the year, a class officer, NHS, Academic All-American, etc. Her grades were very high, her scores higher than average but not tippy top. Nephew was semi-involved, swam, was captain for a year, but nothing spectacular. His grades and scores were near perfect and he is very smart. He was accepted at several elite schools (including Brown, where she wasn’t accepted), but chose his flagship.
She was that kid on the bubble. Got into several schools, waitlisted at others. While in college, she was again a student government officer, in a sorority, played a club sport, study abroad, graduated with honors in 4 years. Really the kind of student a college wants. Nephew is still plugging along. He turned down the honors college because it wasn’t interesting to him. He didn’t do that well his first year. He excels at community college which he attends between taking classes at the flagship. He’s a year or so from graduating and will not be in the 6 year grad statistics for his school(s). He’s fine too, but not really involved in the college life.
That’s why some schools prefer holistic admission. Numbers don’t always tell the whole story.