First it was Johns Hopkins, now Amherst…

I wonder when Rice will explicitly end legacy admissions (though I’m not sure it’s a huge advantage today), as we seem to be pretty “progressive” on issues like this.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/i...sions.html

I always thought being a Rice legacy was little more than a tiebreaker.

Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

Might depend on the parent(s) donation history.

Guess that means my grandson is screwed. He’ll just have to go to the school he prefers anyway.

I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. As somebody who grew up in the northeast, I hate, hate, hate what legacy expectations do to some kids growing up. I'm sure it's different in other areas of the country, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find somebody who grew up in the northeast who speaks positively of legacies (unless of course you've benefitted from the label). But I also think that if an alum's kid is legitimately qualified, and has a candidacy that is comparable to another applicant, he should have the tiebreaker. Maybe you even give a degree of wiggle room. But there have to be standards that are often missing - I went to high school with who knows how many kids who were given opportunities by way of family connections who were entirely undeserving.

(10-20-2021 06:36 PM)elw4796 Wrote:  But I also think that if an alum's kid is legitimately qualified, and has a candidacy that is comparable to another applicant, he should have the tiebreaker. Maybe you even give a degree of wiggle room.

Agree 100%. My son probably made it into Rice on his own, but being a double legacy probably didn't hurt.

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

My son would have been 4th generation and he had a ridiculous application. Wait listed, likely would have gone to Trinity anyway. He's doing just fine with his giant salary at Google.

If I was dictator of the world, I would fire every employee at all universities in the applications departments. Yes, applications as that it was they are really interested in, not admissions. Or maybe rename it as revenue. They get can get a real job instead of getting free trips (pre-virus) all over the country to meet potential applicants. Like Harvard actually needs to travel to California to encourage applicants?

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

There was an earlier conversation about the slow growth of the Rice endowment. When your child is able to follow you there, you tend to give more money. Not sure how big a factor that is, but fairly certain it's not zero.

I wonder how many legacy students apply every year. Anyone know if Rice posts that kind of information?

(10-20-2021 07:43 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

My son would have been 4th generation and he had a ridiculous application. Wait listed, likely would have gone to Trinity anyway. He's doing just fine with his giant salary at Google.

If I was dictator of the world, I would fire every employee at all universities in the applications departments. Yes, applications as that it was they are really interested in, not admissions. Or maybe rename it as revenue. They get can get a real job instead of getting free trips (pre-virus) all over the country to meet potential applicants. Like Harvard actually needs to travel to California to encourage applicants?

The best part is they hire 22-25 year olds who have never done anything post graduation to judge the applications of kids with stellar resumes. At some point they get promoted to running admissions and they’ve never left academia. Like all university administration it’s a giant circle jerk that keeps growing as they pay themselves more by increasing tuition.

(10-21-2021 08:31 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 07:43 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

My son would have been 4th generation and he had a ridiculous application. Wait listed, likely would have gone to Trinity anyway. He's doing just fine with his giant salary at Google.

If I was dictator of the world, I would fire every employee at all universities in the applications departments. Yes, applications as that it was they are really interested in, not admissions. Or maybe rename it as revenue. They get can get a real job instead of getting free trips (pre-virus) all over the country to meet potential applicants. Like Harvard actually needs to travel to California to encourage applicants?

The best part is they hire 22-25 year olds who have never done anything post graduation to judge the applications of kids with stellar resumes. At some point they get promoted to running admissions and they’ve never left academia. Like all university administration it’s a giant circle jerk that keeps growing as they pay themselves more by increasing tuition.

we have a winner in the clubhouse.

I forgot to note in my rant was the admissions part was to generate a low acceptance rate. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how to play that game, get everyone to apply.

(10-20-2021 08:27 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

There was an earlier conversation about the slow growth of the Rice endowment. When your child is able to follow you there, you tend to give more money. Not sure how big a factor that is, but fairly certain it's not zero.

And not just with the mega donors. I would have LOVED for both my kids to attend Rice... and I would give money then only to Rice. Now I'm donating to three Universities.

(10-21-2021 08:46 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 08:27 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.

There was an earlier conversation about the slow growth of the Rice endowment. When your child is able to follow you there, you tend to give more money. Not sure how big a factor that is, but fairly certain it's not zero.

And not just with the mega donors. I would have LOVED for both my kids to attend Rice... and I would give money then only to Rice. Now I'm donating to three Universities.

I sponsor a scholarship at another school in my late son’s name. Had he attended Rice, that’s where it would be.

But I got in then as a legacy.

(10-20-2021 06:17 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Rice has never given squat significance to legacy admissions. This has been a consistent complaint of our late 60s to late 70s graduate cohorts ever since. I recall an article, some years ago, obviously obsolete now, saying that Harvard accorded at least 93% of its admissions to some kind of legacy influence. This was maybe 20 years ago. The world has changed, but the strength of the University has continued to be affected, in no small part, on the strength of its legacy, writ large. But not at Rice.