On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:30:02 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Apr 18, 8:49*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:


That's _The Chronicle of Higher Education_, a consistent finalist for
the National Magazine Award, Dan.

You just don't want to believe the facts because they contradict the
script you have running in your head. Some people will be interested;
most won't care.

--
Ed Huntress

Yes but the source you cited says only about 6 percent of the
applicants had legacy status. And that Legacy mostly counted when
both candidates were highly qualified.

Only 6% of APPLICANTS had legacy status. But at Harvard, for example,
only 7% or 8% of all applicants are ADMITTED. You need to know the
percentage of legacy students admitted OR the percentage of legacy
students in the admitted class to judge the effect of the legacy
status. And I've provided several links in this thread that tell you
just that.


So it is you that does not want to believe the facts.

You've just selected a meaningless fact. That percentage of legacy
applicants is not the issue. The percentage who are ADMITTED is one
issue, and the percentage of legacy students making up the class is
another issue.

As that article said, quoting research published in the journal
_Economics of Education Review_, "In other words, if a nonlegacy
applicant faced a 15-percent chance of admission, an identical
applicant who was a primary legacy would have a 60-percent chance of
getting in."

The script you
have running in your head does not agree with the source you
provided. I think you applied to Princeton and got rejected.

You have another baloney script running around in your head, Dan. How
would you know where I applied?

You're off on another one of your merry-go-'round arguments, only this
time you're making wild guesses in addition to torturing the facts. Go
find something else to occupy your time. You're not getting any more
of mine.

--
Ed Huntress


So
you believe there is a conspiracy that kept you from being accepted.
I did not apply to an Ivy League school and get rejected, so
do not believe in a conspiracy against me.

From the source you cited.

For an individual applicant, legacy or nonlegacy status may indeed
matter a lot. But Mr. Hurwitz cautions that because of the size of the
applicant pools at the sample colleges, legacy admits don't greatly
decrease other students' already-long odds of acceptance. Of the
290,000-plus applications he studied, only about 6 percent had legacy
status.

and

Mr. Hurwitz also looked at how students within certain SAT ranges
fared against one another. There wasn't a clear-cut pattern, but
generally the higher the SAT score, the more legacy status mattered.
That finding, Mr. Hurwitz says, seems in line with colleges' argument
that legacy status matters the most in deciding between two highly-
qualified candidates. "It's easier to justify nudging the student if
they're really strong academically," he says.

So horse **** on your claims. *Your own source refutes what you say.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan