<p>^When I say most, I mean the ones who aren’t developmental admits (developmental admits are the ones whose family members give huge sums of money to the college). </p>
<p>For example, my parents have never given more than $50/year to Cornell. Hence I only got a “slight advantage” in the admissions process. </p>
<p>If someone’s parent gave 2 million to any Ivy, and that person had similar credentials to the kid in your school, they would get in. </p>
<p>The fact is that barely any alumni donate that much money, so very few legacies get the kind of treatment the person from your school got. </p>
<p>In the vast majority of cases, the legacy advantage for Cornell – or any other top school – doesn’t come even close to the recruited athlete advantage in terms of getting in with “underqualified” stats.</p>
<p>There’s a boy at my son’s school who is a recruited athlete. His stat’s would never have qualified him for Cornell. He’s outstanding in his sport and that is what he will contribute once he’s there. My S had to work his tail off to make himself a solid candidate. Once my son is there, he won’t be contributing to a sport in the way his classmate will, so I think that’s fair. It’s nice the classes are made up of lots of kids with lots of talents. We were there for Cornell Days and seeing all the people from really all over the world was exciting. It does seem that Cornell admissions works hard to make a nice mix of people. It will be a great 4 years.</p>
<p>^True, True. Was rejected by Stanford and had a double legacy, great EC’s, Varsity sports, top grades (Top 5%), OK SAT, 2nd best college prep in the NW, and basically the second Mother Theresa (founded my own foundation). </p>
<p>Meanwhile, a kid from a poop school with mediocre grades was accepted ED to swim for the Stanford team.</p>
<p>significant contributing legacy is most important - and that is the way it should be
many kids out there with perfect stats, not may out there with generous legacy.
you build great schools with money and not many contribute big $
there are plenty of smart kids to go around.
recruited athlete is 2nd most important, esp. at schools like stanford which recruit more athletes than anyone else.
better to be an applicant with strong legacy or recruited athlete with just average stats instead of a 2400 4.0 URM - that is for sure.
cornell is real big on their recruited athletes and legacy ed.
cc is not a very accurate sample, but it seems clear that the stats of the unhooked kids that got in ed are way higher than those that got in rd. and there were quite a few high stat kids deferred ed only to get accepted rd.
ps - the legacy advantage is a big factor when significant money is at issue.
cornell (and most any other school) will take a 1800 sat 3.5 with very strong and generous legacy over a 2400 4.0 applicant any day of the week.
makes sense - money builds a great school and not many people are willing to give big alum $
smart kids are a dime a dozen.
good luck</p>
<p>Just wanted to reassure that it’s possible for un-hooked mortals to get into Cornell. My S has very good stats (35 ACT, top 2% of his class in a nothing-special high school), very nice teacher recommendations, but otherwise nothing really noteworthy in terms of his ECs and community service, etc. He doesn’t play any sports seriously. I do think his essay for the supplement really nailed why Cornell would be a good fit for him, so I guess it was his essay and his stats that got him in. Who really knows what they are looking for.</p>
<p>^other than being a starting football and lacrosse player, my son’s story is pretty much the same as above. As in the post above, I believe his essay(s) nailed it, too. His common app essay really spoke to the person he is and it was very accurate and sincere. Since he’s been to Cornell twice and had gone to some classes, he was able to make a good case in his supplemental essay. His college counselor thought he’d be deferred and he wasn’t. The college counselor we hired to help us thought he had a good shot at ED and she was the one who was right.</p>
<p>I know many on this forum talk about demonstrating “fit” is the key, done through essays & EC’s. I think that a more accurate description is that the essays & EC’s show the quaility of personal characteristics the applicant possesses.</p>
<p>By the way, I’ll add that my S “discovered” Cornell in late December (and applied – RD obviously – within the week), so had never visited or done any of the usual “demonstrating interest” things. But there were lots of reasons why Cornell really seemed like a good fit and I guess the adcoms could see that too.</p>