<p>I don’t know how many apply to Ivies, but back in the 1980s, I got to know one young man who made it into Harvard. No one else in his community had heard of Harvard (there goes the illusion that Harvard is known everywhere!); they’d heard of Princeton: it was the name of a nearby community, as poor as theirs. I don’t know if he was in ROTC, but his ambition was to be a military officer. He was a pretty good student, I think, so I’m sure he must have realized his ambition.
Harvard launched its Harvard Financial Aid Initiative a couple of years ago and has seen the number of poor applicants rise significantly. But HYPS had provided full rides to poor applicants for a long time.</p>
<p>In college, I shared a suite with a Puerto Rican who came from such modest background that she had had no quiet place of her own to study. She was used to the sound of the toilet being flushed constantly in her crowded home, so she claimed she could study best when she was closest to the communal bathroom!</p>
<p>Yes - I was agreeing with Interesteddad on the statistical analysis. The point is that the percentages may have little bearing if the underlying numbers are not comparable. If 1000 kids from New York apply to a given school and 10 kids from Alaskan apply, and 6 of the Alaskans are accepted as compare to only 150 New Jerseyans… you could argue that Alaskans are favored with a 60% acceptance rate. But that still leaves 144 more New Yorkers than Alaskans, and you don’t know anything about the underlying characteristics of the applicant pool. Comparing SAT scores doesn’t give you the answer because the SAT itself is not a consistent or fair measure when applied to different population groups. </p>
<p>Alumother wrote:
I think the difference is this: 100% of legacy and developmental candidates come to the attention of the ad com, with a special notation of some sort on their file. The rest of the non-hooked applicants are essentially buried among a sea of similarly well qualified applicants. It isn’t that any one of them gets rejected; it’s just that they do not have as much a chance of being selected out of a competitive applicant pool. </p>
<p>That’s where I think that individuals like Li simply don’t understand the application and selection process. They view it as some sort of linear process where they as an individual will be measured against all other individuals who apply, and the “best” will be selected. But the colleges are looking for variation – as Northstarmom pointed out, they don’t want to end up with a class filled with biochem majors. Li’s resume, as far as can be deciphered from the news articles, is unremarkable: he did the same things as countless other college applicants: president of a student organization, participation in another common student activity (Boys’ State), community service project in Costa Rica. This is the stuff that is a yawner in the world of Ivy admissions – if they were to draw up a list of the 100 most common EC’s listed on applications, these things would probably go on the list. Nothing wrong with that - but nothing outstanding. </p>
<p>If the competition in the field consists entirely of high testing, high achieving students, then having a high test score and a high GPA isn’t relevant to the end point decision – it is merely the qualifier that gets the competitors into the door. From there, it is all about differentiation.</p>
<p>I have to agree with calmom that the “holistic” application process is certainly NOT a linear process.</p>
<p>As for Mr. Li’s resume, I wouldn’t characterize it as unremarkable (after all, Yale gave him the nod, and Yale hasn’t given the thumbs up to anyone in our school history)–but more like “unremarkably remarkable”. Just another BWRK…getting a bunch of rejections and waitlists and a few acceptances from the uber-selective schools on his list.</p>
<p>I only meant unremarkable in the context of high stakes Ivy admissions… where just about every applicant under consideration has an impressive list of achievements. Maybe that means the same as “unremarkably remarkable” … the point is that Li says he “participated in” Boys State. I think it’s likely that any given Ivy has applications from several kids every year who were elected Governor of Boys State or selected as Senators for Boys Nation… so in that field mere participation is not remarkable – just the same as being a varsity athlete on a team that wins the city championship is not the same as being on the team that wins the statewide championship. </p>
<p>My guess is that Princeton accepted other Asian kids and other white kids from Li’s school, and it won’t be difficult at all for someone reviewing the admissions files of each to see why the others were picked over him. (Li’s high school is almost all white and Asian, so those are probably the only 2 groups in contention from his school). That’s not the same as saying that was necessarily the only choice to be made – but the point is that the other kids probably also were all very strong candidates. Each one probably had something that meshed well with Princeton’s needs and made them an attractive candidate.</p>
<p>The day of the undeserving legacy is dead - except in extreme cases like MAJOR (Frist) donors. My daughter applied to Dartmouth as a fourth generation legacy; her stats were in the middle range of what Dartmouth accepts, as were her ECs. Her alumni interviews and (from what the teachers hinted) her recommendations were excellent. Yet, she was turned down. She was also turned down at Princeton where she was a legacy. (Her father is a super-volunteer in alumni affairs.) Rejected. Another person we know had a daughter in a similar position - legacy to Princeton, qualified, and yet not one of the wow-candidates. Turned down. In fact, I know more legacies at Ivies turned down last year than I know of those who were accepted. Yes, when it comes down to two wow-candidates and one is a legacy, the spot will go to the legacy. But that’s about as far as it goes these days. The myth of legacies as sub-par acceptees persists on the CC, and it’s wrong.</p>
<p>I may have told this story before, but we have friends, both parents PhDs from Harvard (and mom was undergrad at H as well, and is on the faculty), kid scored low to mid 700s on SATs, accomplished athlete and musician from a very prestigious private school…deferred at ED, and then outright rejected.</p>
<p>So, MWFN is completely correct about legacies.</p>
<p>“The myth of legacies as sub-par acceptees persists on the CC, and it’s wrong.”</p>
<p>Agree.</p>
<p>“when it comes down to two wow-candidates and one is a legacy, the spot will go to the legacy.”</p>
<p>Same should be used for URMs, the race could/should be the tipping factor - not the driving/determining factor. That is how one can ‘organically’ grow diversity, not by assigning ‘slots’</p>
<p>Yep, that’s about it, Allmusic. Mid-700s SATs, varsity letters, music pursued beyond school, community service, foreign exchange/service programs, mostly As (but not all, and definitely not Cs) . . . and it’s not good enough anymore. That’s why Mr. Li’s ECs are not “outstanding” to those who have seen the qualifications in high-competition geographic areas.</p>
<p>We had a tour guide at Princeton from North Dakota who told the high school students “not to stress” because he got into Princeton with only one score in the 700s and had “lots” of Bs in high school. I wanted to tell him that that wasn’t going to be the case for most of those in the group since they were coming from NY/NJ/PA/MD/VA. Of course, I kept my mouth shut.</p>
<p>Simba–see again my description of the young man I know who was turned down from Princeton. He was well-qualified, actually had some wow ECs, but in the competition that takes place there, they were not wow enough to get him in, even though he is Hispanic. So I think it is the same for race–you have to be really, really impressive before the “hook” gets you in.</p>
<p>garland: I heard you, and yes Li is not going anywhere either.</p>
<p>I would not comment on the young man you are talking about. However, on ‘average’ when you see 230 point advantage of being black or 185 for being hispanic, the logical conclusion one can arrive is that the ‘hook’ came first.</p>
<p>I know directly of two legacy applicants to HYP, one of whom already had a sibling attending, who were rejected with low and upper 1500 boards.(1530ish and 1590ish, both with one 800, and both with high 700s SAT IIs)</p>
<p>I think that most legacy applicants at HYP would stand a better chance if they were able to conceal it. The numbers of legacies are so consistent recently that I believe there is a cap on the legacy admits…so you are forced to compete for the available slots within that application pool. Given the high quality of the pool, and the level of self selection, its a very tall order.</p>
<p>Simba, You know, the interesting thing about him is that he’s very happy now at a very good LAC, which has a better program for what he’s interested in, and gave him great merit money. He didn’t start out by looking at Princeton and the like; his family is not wealthy, and they were much more interested in merit aid, plus they are not status or rank conscious at all. ONce he got his SAT score, Princeton came looking for him, not the othe way around, especially when they also saw he played football and has extraordinary musical abilities. And, he’s also about the nicest, most thoughtful, kid of his age I’ve ever met (taught him in Sunday school) so it wasn’t a character thing. That’s why I really do believe it comes down to the unbelievable level of competition, for both him and for Mr. Li.</p>
<p>“The day of the undeserving legacy is dead.”</p>
<p>I’ll agree to this too – and concur that even deserving legacies don’t get in. I have evidence of this from Brown admissions: strong legacy applicants with active parents rejected. I know of at least five legacies applying this year; we’ll see what happens. One is my daughter, and everyone who doesn’t know about admissions assures us that “of course she’ll get in, why worry?” What Calmom says about legacies coming to the attention of the committee is on target – although I think some of that is changing too. I know a legacy last year who applied from a school that sent 40 applications to Brown and from what I learned, she didn’t get any special attention – she was lumped with that pool, didn’t stand out, and so didn’t get in.</p>
<p>Chiming in: My unscientific sense of what is happening with the children of my cohort at Yale is (1) more don’t get in than do, notwithstanding strong records (as confirmed by the places that DO accept them), and (2) they are still noticeably more likely to get in than a similar kid off the street.</p>
<p>calmom made good points about Li’s classmates probably applying to HYP as well & Princeton being able to disprove anti-Asian bias by showing how he compared to these kids. I live not too far from Livingston & just checked their website. I was surprised to see only 5 kids went to Ivies from the class of 2006: 3 Cornell, 1 Princeton, 1 Harvard, 1 Yale (r. Li.) It’s a very wealth community, very Jewish & Asian. Then I realized that the uber-wealthy often send their kids to Newark Academy right in town. It’s a $20K+ private that has facilities that would put many colleges to shame. Anyway, for anyone interested, here are the graduating class college choices for Livingston 2006:</p>
<p>“I was surprised to see only 5 kids went to Ivies from the class of 2006: 3 Cornell, 1 Princeton, 1 Harvard, 1 Yale (r. Li.) It’s a very wealth community, very Jewish & Asian. Then I realized that the uber-wealthy often send their kids to Newark Academy right in town. It’s a $20K+ private that has facilities that would put many colleges to shame.”</p>
<p>Glad to see that the “uber-wealthy” are Jewish and Asian in your mind. Can’t we throw just a few white Christians in the mix? I believe they control most of the wealth in this country. Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Donald Trump? Oh, how about George Bush and Dick Cheney? Their children went right into inner-city schools?</p>
<p>OK how about we juxtapose Jews and Asians against blacks and Hispanics in this discussion, and forget the wealthy Anglos. That should make for a fun time, and get the antisemites, anti-Asians (as a whole, let’s forget about countries of origin) and the guilt-tripped liberals into this discussion. Maybe instead, each of you should go and tutor an illiterate white, black or Asian this afternoon (if you can find one in your suburbs or small New England or Western US towns.)</p>
<p>“I’ll agree to this too – and concur that even deserving legacies don’t get in. I have evidence of this from Brown admissions: strong legacy applicants with active parents rejected”</p>
<p>collegialmom: You must really be looking for a fight if you found anti-Semitism in my post. It’s strictly factual. Livingston is heavily Asian & Jewish. The uber-wealthy among them often send their kids to a pricey prep school in town. That would siphon off many of the Ivy-caliber kids from the public. </p>
<p>What planet do you live on where Jews & Asians don’t make up a big piece of the Ivy applicants? Here on planet earth, they do.</p>