[Leftcoast]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a brobdingnagian Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Applicants with that background will do just fine without Stanford but this time, it was a loss for Stanford sports.  The son had attended football games since he was in kindergarten and knew more stats, player numbers, and football biographies than I did.  He even recorded and watched Stanford Football games so he could practice calling them for broadcast.  

He ended up going to Michigan and was soon calling football games for the student radio station broadcasting Harbaugh's NEW team.  From there he went on to get his PHD at UW.  Great kid and things turned out well for him so no complaints from him or his parents now.  But .... He's no longer a Stanford fan.

I know many other stories like that and only a few "happier" admit outcomes.  It seems that all my Stanford friend's children applied to Stanford with rare wins in that admissions lottery.  All these Stanford legacy admit article sound out of tune with my personal experience.

[Leftcoast]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a brobdingnagian Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Applicants with that background will do just fine without Stanford but this time, it was a loss for Stanford sports.  The son had attended football games since he was in kindergarten and knew more stats, player numbers, and football biographies than I did.  He even recorded and watched Stanford Football games so he could practice calling them for broadcast.  

He ended up going to Michigan and was soon calling football games for the student radio station broadcasting Harbaugh's NEW team.  From there he went on to get his PHD at UW.  Great kid and things turned out well for him so no complaints from him or his parents now.  But .... He's no longer a Stanford fan.

I know many other stories like that and only a few "happier" admit outcomes.  It seems that all my Stanford friend's children applied to Stanford with rare wins in that admissions lottery.  All these Stanford legacy admit article sound out of tune with my personal experience.

[cardcrimson]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a of immense proportions Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Okay, I've missed something. When did the thin envelope mean a rejection? In my day, it was a thin envelop with a signed welcome from Dean Fred that welcomed you. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a of immense proportions Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Okay, I've missed something. When did the thin envelope mean a rejection? In my day, it was a thin envelop with a signed welcome from Dean Fred that welcomed you. . . .

[Leftcoast]

It's no doubt changed in an era of online admissions and acceptance but in my day (and the day of many others) the thin letter was the simple one page rejection.  

The thick letter in addition to the Dean Fred letter included a bunch of information, dorm sign-up forms, info on classes, and a well prepared introduction to Stanford booklet.  The entire application process was part of Stanford's "sell" and that didn't stop just because you'd been accepted.  Stanford wanted to make sure every person who got that thick letter also matriculated.

[Leftcoast]

It's no doubt changed in an era of online admissions and acceptance but in my day (and the day of many others) the thin letter was the simple one page rejection.  

The thick letter in addition to the Dean Fred letter included a bunch of information, dorm sign-up forms, info on classes, and a well prepared introduction to Stanford booklet.  The entire application process was part of Stanford's "sell" and that didn't stop just because you'd been accepted.  Stanford wanted to make sure every person who got that thick letter also matriculated.

[cardcrimson]

It's no doubt changed in an era of online admissions and acceptance but in my day (and the day of many others) the thin letter was the simple one page rejection.  

The thick letter in addition to the Dean Fred letter included a bunch of information, dorm sign-up forms, info on classes, and a well prepared introduction to Stanford booklet.  The entire application process was part of Stanford's "sell" and that didn't stop just because you'd been accepted.  Stanford wanted to make sure every person who got that thick letter also matriculated.

Perhaps my memory is a bit hazy, but I thought the second touch point was the thick envelop with all the sell and intro stuff. . . .

[cardcrimson]

It's no doubt changed in an era of online admissions and acceptance but in my day (and the day of many others) the thin letter was the simple one page rejection.  

The thick letter in addition to the Dean Fred letter included a bunch of information, dorm sign-up forms, info on classes, and a well prepared introduction to Stanford booklet.  The entire application process was part of Stanford's "sell" and that didn't stop just because you'd been accepted.  Stanford wanted to make sure every person who got that thick letter also matriculated.

Perhaps my memory is a bit hazy, but I thought the second touch point was the thick envelop with all the sell and intro stuff. . . .

[Leftcoast]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

[Leftcoast]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

[pefloresjr]

In 82, the denial was a thin letter in a business envelope.  A few of my friends got these on the same day but I didn't get anything.  The next day, the Dean Fred "Great" admission letter arrived in the same size regular business envelope with some other materials making it a thick envelope.  Shortly afterward a large 8 1/2 by 11 envelope with more information was sent.  That's how I remember it.  
Hurrying across an open field to get to my house during lunch break from school the day the letter arrived seeing that the mail was in the box was one of the most nerve-wracking experiences of my life.  The thickness of the envelope let me know that it wasn't the same denial that my friends had unfortunately received.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

In 82, the denial was a thin letter in a business envelope.  A few of my friends got these on the same day but I didn't get anything.  The next day, the Dean Fred "Great" admission letter arrived in the same size regular business envelope with some other materials making it a thick envelope.  Shortly afterward a large 8 1/2 by 11 envelope with more information was sent.  That's how I remember it.  
Hurrying across an open field to get to my house during lunch break from school the day the letter arrived seeing that the mail was in the box was one of the most nerve-wracking experiences of my life.  The thickness of the envelope let me know that it wasn't the same denial that my friends had unfortunately received.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[norcard10]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a of immense proportions Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Applicants with that background will do just fine without Stanford but this time, it was a loss for Stanford sports.  The son had attended football games since he was in kindergarten and knew more stats, player numbers, and football biographies than I did.  He even recorded and watched Stanford Football games so he could practice calling them for broadcast.  

He ended up going to Michigan and was soon calling football games for the student radio station broadcasting Harbaugh's NEW team.  From there he went on to get his PHD at UW.  Great kid and things turned out well for him so no complaints from him or his parents now.  But .... He's no longer a Stanford fan.

I know many other stories like that and only a few "happier" admit outcomes.  It seems that all my Stanford friend's children applied to Stanford with rare wins in that admissions lottery.  All these Stanford legacy admit article sound out of tune with my personal experience.

Program needs to win and problem solved.  No need to increase legacy admissions for home grown fans.

[norcard10]

I nodded when I read OCCardinal's account of admissions spending a lot of time consoling alums whose admit worthy children DIDN'T get in.

One friend's kid was a of immense proportions Stanford sports fan, double legacy, straight As, many honors/AP classes, PACO level violinist. Parents gave to both the AD and the General Fund.  One parent was even on staff at Stanford.   They got the thin envelope.

Applicants with that background will do just fine without Stanford but this time, it was a loss for Stanford sports.  The son had attended football games since he was in kindergarten and knew more stats, player numbers, and football biographies than I did.  He even recorded and watched Stanford Football games so he could practice calling them for broadcast.  

He ended up going to Michigan and was soon calling football games for the student radio station broadcasting Harbaugh's NEW team.  From there he went on to get his PHD at UW.  Great kid and things turned out well for him so no complaints from him or his parents now.  But .... He's no longer a Stanford fan.

I know many other stories like that and only a few "happier" admit outcomes.  It seems that all my Stanford friend's children applied to Stanford with rare wins in that admissions lottery.  All these Stanford legacy admit article sound out of tune with my personal experience.

Program needs to win and problem solved.  No need to increase legacy admissions for home grown fans.

[lex24]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

[lex24]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

[cardcrimson]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

[lex24]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

[lex24]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

[cardcrimson]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

Thanks! The Cardinal isn't on her radar, though two crimson related legacy schools are. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

Thanks! The Cardinal isn't on her radar, though two crimson related legacy schools are. . . .

[Mick]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

Thanks! The Cardinal isn't on her radar, though two crimson related legacy schools are. . . .

Good admissions fortune to your daughter, buddy...

---

At Stanford University, 302 students newly admitted in the fall of 2019, or 17.8% of the first-year class, were children of Stanford graduates or financial donors. Last fall there were 266 of those students, or 14.9% of the class.

The University of Southern California reported 1,889 new students related to alumni or donors in the fall of 2019, 16% of all newly admitted students. There were 1,740 such students in the fall of 2022, 14% of the total.

The percentages were higher at Santa Clara: 343 students, or 24.7% of all new enrollees, in 2019-20, and 294, or 17.7% of the total, in 2022-23.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/art...he%20class.

Just saw this. Doesn't surprise me much, given that SCU is an ultra-regional university, particularly as their rankings have gradually increased over the past decade or so. Both Mrs. Mick and I are alums, but neither of our sons applied there -- although I would have been perfectly happy if they'd attended SCU, particularly if they were inclined toward accounting or civil engineering.

[Mick]

Affirmative action for the privileged. All legacy programs should be abolished.

Can we at least wait a year on any rash decisions? 

My only kid is applying in a few months. . . .

Good luck to her.

Thanks! The Cardinal isn't on her radar, though two crimson related legacy schools are. . . .

Good admissions fortune to your daughter, buddy...

---

At Stanford University, 302 students newly admitted in the fall of 2019, or 17.8% of the first-year class, were children of Stanford graduates or financial donors. Last fall there were 266 of those students, or 14.9% of the class.

The University of Southern California reported 1,889 new students related to alumni or donors in the fall of 2019, 16% of all newly admitted students. There were 1,740 such students in the fall of 2022, 14% of the total.

The percentages were higher at Santa Clara: 343 students, or 24.7% of all new enrollees, in 2019-20, and 294, or 17.7% of the total, in 2022-23.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/art...he%20class.

Just saw this. Doesn't surprise me much, given that SCU is an ultra-regional university, particularly as their rankings have gradually increased over the past decade or so. Both Mrs. Mick and I are alums, but neither of our sons applied there -- although I would have been perfectly happy if they'd attended SCU, particularly if they were inclined toward accounting or civil engineering.

[JJJ]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

My recollection is similar to yours, but we are in the same class, so it may not be much of a data point! :)

[JJJ]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

My recollection is similar to yours, but we are in the same class, so it may not be much of a data point! :)

[TrumpCard]

Yes of course that’s what it meant.

[TrumpCard]

Yes of course that’s what it meant.

[Mick]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

My recollection is similar to yours, but we are in the same class, so it may not be much of a data point! :)

I never actually saw my thin envelope. My stepmother got the daily mail, opened my letter, informed me I didn't get in, then threw out the letter. Never actually got to see it.

[Mick]

Or mine is!  Equally possible.

My memory is “thin envelope” meant polite rejection so let’s hear from the others on the board? What about it folks?

My recollection is similar to yours, but we are in the same class, so it may not be much of a data point! :)

I never actually saw my thin envelope. My stepmother got the daily mail, opened my letter, informed me I didn't get in, then threw out the letter. Never actually got to see it.

[akiddoc]

If you want to get a flavor of Stanford's treatment of legacy applicants, ask Howard Wolf (alumni relations VP) about it. Stanford absolutely gives preferential treatment. Maybe Stanford admits fewer legacies than Harvard or Yale or Princeton (where they could be as much as 1/3 of the class). But there is no doubt that it's measurably easier for a legacy to be admitted than an applicant from the general pool.

And it will be a major change to Stanford's admissions if it is forced to abandon that practice.

I have been corresponding with Wolf by email on this topic for 5 years. Primarily my concern has been that rich alumni are buying spots at Stanford for their children. He vehemently denies it, then in the next sentence says how important it is to consider donations and legacy. Totally tone deaf. 

I recently renewed the conversation with all of the national attention regarding legacy admissions. His response this time was that Stanford is reevaluating it’s position. He said that there have been many similar emails from concerned alumni.

[akiddoc]

If you want to get a flavor of Stanford's treatment of legacy applicants, ask Howard Wolf (alumni relations VP) about it. Stanford absolutely gives preferential treatment. Maybe Stanford admits fewer legacies than Harvard or Yale or Princeton (where they could be as much as 1/3 of the class). But there is no doubt that it's measurably easier for a legacy to be admitted than an applicant from the general pool.

And it will be a major change to Stanford's admissions if it is forced to abandon that practice.

I have been corresponding with Wolf by email on this topic for 5 years. Primarily my concern has been that rich alumni are buying spots at Stanford for their children. He vehemently denies it, then in the next sentence says how important it is to consider donations and legacy. Totally tone deaf. 

I recently renewed the conversation with all of the national attention regarding legacy admissions. His response this time was that Stanford is reevaluating it’s position. He said that there have been many similar emails from concerned alumni.