[Mudhead]

I think admissions has also had a great deal of randomness.

There are two people from my high school in the suburbs of Cincinnati to attend Stanford, both Stanford class of '82.  We had no AP classes, but did have calculus and two years of chemistry and one of physics.  We both applied for admission in Sept 1978, only one was accepted (not me).  I told John to do well and I'd transfer the next year, he did and I did (although I did not get the good news until Aug 1979).

Agree completely regarding randomness. Two of our sons applied to Stanford. The one who, in my opinion was less qualified, got in. The second was wait listed but not admitted . Apparently , admission depended a great deal on class mix.,geography, interests, special skills. So much so that a student admitted in year one might be turned down in year two .  That’s not to say the process is unfair or biased (it may be but that is another question) just to say there is a degree of chance.

Does anyone else find it ironic and slightly concerning that just about the time minority graduates with children of admission age are becoming a significant % of the total, there is a push to do away with any credit for being a legacy?  Again, I don’t have enough data to even hint at a cause and effect .

[Mudhead]

I think admissions has also had a great deal of randomness.

There are two people from my high school in the suburbs of Cincinnati to attend Stanford, both Stanford class of '82.  We had no AP classes, but did have calculus and two years of chemistry and one of physics.  We both applied for admission in Sept 1978, only one was accepted (not me).  I told John to do well and I'd transfer the next year, he did and I did (although I did not get the good news until Aug 1979).

Agree completely regarding randomness. Two of our sons applied to Stanford. The one who, in my opinion was less qualified, got in. The second was wait listed but not admitted . Apparently , admission depended a great deal on class mix.,geography, interests, special skills. So much so that a student admitted in year one might be turned down in year two .  That’s not to say the process is unfair or biased (it may be but that is another question) just to say there is a degree of chance.

Does anyone else find it ironic and slightly concerning that just about the time minority graduates with children of admission age are becoming a significant % of the total, there is a push to do away with any credit for being a legacy?  Again, I don’t have enough data to even hint at a cause and effect .