Pizza- like I said- I have no idea who makes what among my classmates. But their gifts to the university are published; so that’s one datapoint. Where they live is another. And what they do for a living- yet a third.
So I haven’t a clue as to whether the big donors in my class (and we are not yet 60, the prime philanthropy years) are disproportionately generous vs. their income and savings; incredibly lucky (one was- company went public and his share was on the front page of the WSJ); or significantly wealthier than their datapoints might suggest (inherited wealth?). What I can tell you is that folks like this are not “garden variety”.
And “garden variety” legacies- the son of the pastor- are not waltzing into Brown. (He went to Penn, so don’t cry for him).
" I respond by telling them that their kids (unlike mine) will be shoo-ins at Stanford, which is (by far) the ne plus ultra school out west."
Do you really think that’s wise to say that?
Btw I know a family where the husband and wife went to NU with me. Standard issue upper middle class (he’s a lawyer, not sure what she does, but nothing that makes me think they are funding the science center). Live in a medium sized Midwestern city. They have two boys who also went to NU. Top students, clearly qualified, yada yada. Now boy 3 is coming through this year (he is a rising hs senior). Currently valedictorian, significant leadership in a particular EC, the whole nine yards, and plans to apply ED (I’m pretty sure the older boys did as well). Our group of friends is collectively holding our breath to hope he gets in - it would be devastating if he alone didn’t. That is not to remotely suggest he is “owed” acceptance - they will do what they will and that’s that.
But it would be insane for us to suggest that this kid is a shoo-in, and I don’t understand what would possess you to tell your friend his kids are shoo-ins at Stanford. If I didn’t know you weren’t new here I’d say - are you new here?
No kid is a shoe in. As long time CC readers know, my son applied to colleges 2 days before winter break in his junior year. He applied to UPenn, but no time for an interview. Between grandparents and aunts/uncles, he didn’t have enough space to fill out all the alumni. His stats were probably higher than any relative. He didn’t get in. Nonetheless, years later, I encouraged best friend to have his son, then daughter, apply ED. Both got in, with great $$$.
Had my son applied ED, or at least in time for an interview, I suspect he would have been admitted. My point, a match school may still be a true question. I’m sure if older siblings were accepted, but didn’t attend, it would no longer be a match for #3.
And this is one and only place where “legacy” is specifically mentioned. It is part of the ED narrative. I think - you’d be better off not to mention your legacy status in RD. You might want to get in on your other merits. And I suspect (warning: speculate) that legacy status may even hurt you in RD.
“So I haven’t a clue as to whether the big donors in my class (and we are not yet 60, the prime philanthropy years) are disproportionately generous vs. their income and savings”
I wasn’t expecting you to! I’m just expressing my own point of view - I wouldn’t be donating six or seven figures to a school in hopes of easing the way for junior unless / until my estate allowance was maxed out. Because an estate left to junior is a sure thing; a bequest given in hopes of getting junior in isn’t a sure thing at all. That’s all.
Oops-- this never posted. It was in response to post # 655: Maybe the strategy is to convince the competition they are a shoe-in at a school one’ owns kids aren’t applying to, so the competition wont apply to the schools one’s kids are applying to.
By the way, there’s a chart in the above quoted article about the applicant pool broken down by geographic areas, which is rarely revealed by elite colleges. Is the distribution of applicants in Penn consistent with your findings about the distribution of the admitted class, @Pizzagirl ? I have to say it surprises me that there are so many more applicants from the south than from New England.
Well, just because your friends say silly things doesn’t mean you have to join them.
My kid had a teacher who told him that being from Chicago would be an advantage in applying to Georgetown. As if Chicago was so exotic that Georgetown would say - oh, wow, never seen one of those! Better snap him up! I just rolled my eyes at that teacher’s stupidity.
Seriously, I don’t think any national university distinguishes between professional-class applicants from the Denver suburbs and professional-class applicants from the Boston, New York, Philadelphia, or Washington suburbs. Or Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas. No one, not Harvard and not Stanford, feels a need to increase its geographical diversity by admitting the children of lawyers and doctors from big-city suburbs. (Well, that’s not quite true. Some more clearly region-bound colleges might do that. But not the big boys.)
Historically, Stanford would say things to the effect that it didn’t care about geographical diversity at all, because California has the most ethnically and culturally diverse population in the world. It could admit its entire class from California and have more real diversity than anyone else. I don’t think it still has that attitude; it clearly wants a national and international student body. But applying to Stanford from Scarsdale High is no less competitive than applying from Pacific Palisades High.
“No one, not Harvard and not Stanford, feels a need to increase its geographical diversity by admitting the children of lawyers and doctors from big-city suburbs. (Well, that’s not quite true. Some more clearly region-bound colleges might do that. But not the big boys.)”
And there’s no shortage of big-city suburb children of lawyers and doctors at any elite school. Because they’re pretty much all the same. For all intents and purposes, being upper middle class suburban is the same general experience no matter where you are.
It would be interesting to see what Naviance shows.
I’m in the opposite situation geographically. My kids and their classmates, from the DC suburbs, knew that getting into Georgetown was next to impossible for them. But a surprisingly large number of top students got into Northwestern.
I don’t think that being from DC gives you an advantage at Northwestern or that being from Chicago gives you an advantage at Georgetown. I think it’s more that NOT being local might give you an advantage at either school. And perhaps that’s what the teacher had in mind.
What college doesn’t have a ton of local students? Harvard does, Yale does, Columbia does, Penn does, Stanford sure does. I’m pretty sure Princeton does, too, if one defines “local” appropriately.
I’m sure people perceive that it’s hard to get into the local elite university, because so many people apply and are disappointed. But I think from the standpoint of the admissions staff, they feel like they are bending over backwards to admit local students. Now, some of those will be facbrats or the scions of local powerbrokers important to the university, some will be legacies, and some may be risky underprivileged diamonds-in-the-rough. So it’s not necessarily the unhooked (upper-upper) middle class kids on whom a lot of this discussion focuses. But I certainly don’t have the impression that colleges discriminate against local applicants.
Actually, my local NYC westchester suburb high school is a big feeder to Cornell and Columbia. They seem to take more of our kids than their peers. Also, I once attended a talk given by the dean of admissions at brown and he said that they look for excellent applicants from RI as one way of acknowledging their tax break from the state. Of course, they are also one of the largest employers in the state and their students give back in all sorts of ways, volunteering in gov’t, tutoring at local underprivileged schools, etc.
I think being from Scarsdale helps at Pomona or Rice. I think being from Winnetka helps at Furman or Davidson. I think being from Lexington (MA) helps at Reed or St. Olaf.
But I think people are kidding themselves if they think that Northwestern or Georgetown have to “dig deep” to uncover kids from DC suburbs or Chicago suburbs, respectively. The pool is very deep my friends.
I think it is important to note that often people are trying really hard to be nice and positive, and to say something to that effect, even if the reality is a bit silly.
Like when people tell me a particular shirt looks great on me.
This teacher wouldn’t have known Georgetown if she’d tripped over it. I knew more about it, having been accepted there back in the day and having just toured it with my son (as it so happened, our tour guide was also a Chicago-area kid). I don’t remotely buy that Chicago-area counts as “exotic” or “unusual” in the pool of G applications - nor does DC applicant count as exotic or unusual in NU circles. All big yawners as far as I was concerned, and nothing that would be an advantage.
The pool from DC can be exceptional. Still can’t take 'em all. Some areas/school districts that produce a lot of highly competitive kids have been named. Chappaqua, Scarsdale, kids from DC privates or suburban hs, parts of IL. Throw in Houston and all sorts of pockets in CA. So, some geo diversity tip is muted.
Elite schools are in no lack of applicants from major metros like Chicago. So much so from the state representation point of view, Delaware is probably more underrepresented than Illinois in elite colleges in New England. The neighboring Indiana is another story…
