<p>whartongrad08, those are very interesting numbers. Thank you.</p>
<p>Does your source also have information on the relative qualifications of legacy admits and other admitted students?</p>
<p>@wharton</p>
<p>Interesting numbers, for sure.
Doesn’t Penn usually get depicted as practicing the most legacy preference of the Ivy league? Those numbers don’t seem to indicate that.</p>
<p>@CJaneRead: you are right in that it gets depicted that way and i think its mainly because Penn adcoms have been pretty consistent in saying that legacy plays a large role for ED admissions (but not much for RD). If you look at the full numbers below you get a nice picture of that. its interesting to compare it to Harvard or Princeton where the boost is just astronomically high relative to Penn, Yale, Dartmouth, etc. but most people dont depict H and P in the same light as penn.</p>
<p>again given these numbers are a bit outdated assuming roughly the same legacy rate Penn’s multiples have increased and are probably overall around 2.5x which means that for ED they are probably closer to 3.0X+ </p>
<p>Class of 2010: </p>
<p>Accepted Applied Rate Multiple
EARLY DECISION:
Legacy 254 523 48.6% 1.9x
Non-Legacy 926 3,625 25.5%
Total 1,180 4,148 28.4% </p>
<p>REGULAR DECISION:
Legacy 137 736 18.6% 1.4x
Non-Legacy 2,305 16,964 13.6%
Total 2,442 17,700 13.8% </p>
<p>TOTAL:
Legacy 391 1,259 31.1% 1.8x
Non-Legacy 3,231 19,220 16.8%
Total 3,622 20,479 17.7%</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I pulled all of these from publically available sources and so no none of the sources break out qualifications of legacy admits vs. other students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? Oh please. I don’t have a problem with schools privileging athletes,* even though my kids won’t benefit from that. I don’t have a problem with schools privileging URM’s or lower socioeconomic classes, even though my kids won’t benefit from that. I’m fully aware upper middle class Jewish applicants from major metropolitan areas are a dime a dozen at selective schools.</p>
<ul>
<li>I don’t like how there is a separate admissions policy explicitly for athletes that occurs outside of the regular process, but I don’t have a problem with a school saying that it values athletic prowess.</li>
</ul>
<p>^ Sorry for the inaccurate statement
So it sounds like you just always arduously defend whatever admission policy that deemphasize stats, correct? and you call everyone criticizing any policy a “whiner”</p>
<h1>276 and #285 Where are the published stats related to upper middle class Jews at selective schools? Both Marion and PG claim to know this as fact. Both your statements sound prejudicial to me. I think the “legacy statement” is particularly erroneous since Jews were barred entrance to the Ivy League (Princeton is notorious for its anti-Semitic stance).</h1>
<p>“I’m fully aware upper middle class Jewish applicants from major metropolitan areas are a dime a dozen at selective schools.” #285</p>
<p>So what? Are Jews URM’s or other special classes identified on college applications?</p>
<p>I think roughly 2% of the US population is Jewish, and roughly 20-25% of students in the Ivy League are Jewish. Since you vociferously proclaim elite schools include much more than the Ivy League, that alters that figure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The schools won’t release any hard data on that, to preserve the ambiguity and uncertainty about legacy preferences. It is in the schools’ interest that alumni feel that their kids get some advantage, while others feel that they still have a chance despite the legacy preference. If the magnitude of the legacy preference were quantified, it is likely to result in more of a backlash (than there already is) from one group or the other (i.e. if it is zero or small, alumni donations may fall; if it is large, the school may lose some of the top non-legacy applicants who may feel that it is not worth applying to that school).</p>
<p>Something similar goes for political hot-button preferences like URM.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not fact. Just personal impression, and I may be wrong, or what I have noticed may apply only to some colleges and not others.</p>
<p>And you knew they were upper middle class Jews because they were wearing a yellow star on their arm and you saw their bank account?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you serious? Kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth vs. kids born to a single working mom? To be a successful society we need full participation by ALL of our citizens, not just those who were given an extreme advantage as a child. It would be ideal if there wasn’t “a whit of difference between them”…but in the real world that is a fantasy. So sad that so many are willing to comment on things they do not fully understand.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wrote that to make the point that those who decry affirmative action or preferences for first-gen college/working-class kids and yet, say nothing about or worse…support legacy/developmental admissions are nothing but hypocrites.</p>
<p>^ I agree with cobrat. Both these policies are bad as they give big disadvantage to many hard-working students based on something these students can never change: their parents.</p>
<p>^ a “big disadvantage?” Are you sure? I haven’t met any hard working students with great stats who weren’t able to get into a great university. But if it makes certain kids(or their parents) feel better by saying, “I would have gotten in if those darn minorities or poor kids didn’t take my spot” well to each his own. Amazing that these universities that a few want so desperately to attend, can keep up their reputations when they are “obviously” not taking the most meritorious students. And every year the same kind of parents whine about the same kind of issues. If only…</p>
<p>Money talks! It works in politics, college admission and everywhere. Any ignorance or denial are in vain.</p>
<p>You know, a lot of the parents that “formed” those legacies were actually lower to middle class kids themselves. The way some of you go on, you’d think that legacy families were all Kennedys or Rockefellers or Bushes or something.</p>
<p>^ Exactly!</p>
<p>The parents of the legacy students I knew were almost all middle class when they attended. Some went on to become very successful, but most of them came from pretty humble beginnings: their parents were Eastern European or Irish immigrants, some who worked as servants and had grade school educations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Graduating from an elite college doesn’t make one the possessor of the silver spoon. This is the usual CC drivel that everyone who attends an elite school winds up with a charmed, moneyed life.</p>
<p>
How many are “some?” I have to say that after several years reading results threads on CC, I have only heard of a tiny handful of such kids, and almost all of them got into other very good schools. I have hardly seen any legacy kids who got into the legacy school but no other highly selective schools (of course, they may not admit it, or like my son, may have withdrawn apps after getting into the legacy school early). Rather, if you look at the results threads, kids with perfect stats tend to get into multiple top schools–as long as they applied to enough of them. I suspect that the kids with “perfect” stats that people hear about are kids with all As in high schools and very good–but not actually perfect–standardized test scores.</p>