How far will a letter from a major donor get me?

[deleted480308]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Admissions, particularly in public schools, should be a meritocracy. Legacies should not be given extra consideration.

 

[brozart]

Legacies and connections are real, whether we like it or not.

 

[ridethecliche]

To me, legacy admissions really just make sense.

Legacy interviewees are a completely worthless stat. Give me legacy matriculates and then we'll talk.

I like that Legacy admits make sense to you, but URM 'boosts' (in your word) don't.

A+ trolling effort.

I don't think legacies should get preference over URMs or vice versa. But I can see the logic in choosing a legacy over someone you have absolutely no connection with. For me (I don't know about others) it boils down to trust and reliability. If "you" know one of their family members or family friends, and they vouch for the applicant, that means something to me. This is the core concept behind rec letters. Different letters from different people carry varying degrees of weight for obvious reasons. Like I said, this may not be "fair" but it is logical.

So you also support nepotism.

This is fascinating. Your worldview is so nuanced!

 

[Microglia]

Admissions, particularly in public schools, should be a meritocracy. Legacies should not be given extra consideration.

I agree with you, yet it boils down to money and the fact that the people on admissions have preformed opinions of some people. I haven't been able to think of a reliable way to change the system- short of using an entirely computerized admissions system and flooding the school with no-strings-attached tax dollars.

 

[NickNaylor]

At my institution, being a legacy or otherwise having that connection to the university/medical school will get you no more than an interview. If you're not a quality applicant, you can get letters from whoever you want and you won't get an acceptance. "Courtesy" interviews absolutely do exist, though.

The only treatment legacies get that differs from other applicants is that if they end up getting rejected, they will get a call from the dean personally to let them know. They will also be offered an opportunity to receive feedback on their application. In terms of the actual admissions process, though, they do not receive preferential treatment after the interview phase.

 

[deleted480308]

I agree with you, yet it boils down to money and the fact that the people on admissions have preformed opinions of some people. I haven't been able to think of a reliable way to change the system- short of using an entirely computerized admissions system and flooding the school with no-strings-attached tax dollars.

There isn't an easy mechanism to reproduce deontological ethics shy if simply repeating yourself until someone catches on....if i knew and easier method, I would do it

 

[ChemEngMD]

Interestingly, when I applied a couple years back the only school I had connections to (a relative was a high ranking faculty member) ended up being the only school to reject me pre-interview. Hahaha. I didn't leverage the connection or make any mention of it, just wasn't worth it to me and my cycle was going well on it's own. That being said, nepotism is very real in medicine, and ESPECIALLY in residency and faculty position applications. Be very wary of this as your career progresses. Like in business, who likes you can matter much more than your accomplishments. On day 1 of med school they asked students who had at least 1 physician parent to raise their hand in lecture- it was a solid 30-35% of the class. I hear this has been decreasing as time goes on, but apparently ten years ago it was always over 50% of the class.

Just off of independently speaking with students in my class we are well over 50% physician parents and I think we are near 75% of the students having at least 1 parent with a doctoral degree (PhD, JD, MD, etc).

Students from lower incomes or students who come from backgrounds that have been systematically prevented from attaining this level of education in the past are truly a rare breed in some medical schools. However, this could theoretically just be my class - I don't have a big enough n at the moment lol - but I think it speaks to a larger pattern in medicine and higher education.

 

[Goro]

Do I have data for this? Yes, at my own school. I have personally witnessed this. My Adcom colleagues have commented on this at their schools.

Do you guys actually have any data for this or is this all anecdotal mumbling? The reason people don't ***** about this is because the data isn't there. Please, if you have some reliable info to share (Lawgiver) then put it forward, otherwise you're just spewing racist BS.

To me, legacy admissions really just make sense. (For the record, I don't think they're fair, but it's common sense to see where they are coming from). If you had two equal applicants and one comes from a family that already graduated (and was successful) it's not too hard to see how this would be beneficial for the student. Is this fair? Most would say no - but again, when have medical schools been about what's "fair?"

If we had data to examine we might actually find that legacy acceptances we more likely to do well in school, we just don't know.

I knew a person who's good family friend was actually on the ad com and his father graduated from the school (M.D.). He didn't even get an interview at the school. Good application all around, and higher stats than the school's average. He ended up getting in to a better school elsewhere, but it just goes to show you that this swings both ways. Don't let all of these anecdotal stories scare you - legacy admissions don't play the same role they did generations ago. If you class has legacies, most likely they would've been accepted without the legacy status.



Haha. This sounds familiar! Funny how your opinion changes. As long as you think it's fair to give people a bump, it's OK.

 

[gyngyn]

The point of letters of recommendation is to get the viewpoint of an unbiased person who knows the candidate. One's family member or family friend is not impartial. Of course, if you are going to get a letter that says, "I am a trustee at the university and I strongly recommend my nephew for admission" it may well be that one has no choice but to interview the nephew or there will be hell to pay. It is not fair, it is logical, but it is not logical that such applicants should be automatic "admits".

They have their "people" contact the school or have the University President's people contact admissions to alert us to the "opportunity." They usually have the good grace not to actually write the letter themselves!

 

[Womb Raider]

Do I have data for this? Yes, at my own school. I have personally witnessed this. My Adcom colleagues have commented on this at their schools.

I'm sure you have access to lots of information, I just wish some of that was available to the public. Releasing legacy stat info probably isn't a good PR move for the school. If there's some public data available I'd love to see it though.

I like that Legacy admits make sense to you, but URM 'boosts' (in your word) don't.

A+ trolling effort.

So you also support nepotism.

This is fascinating. Your worldview is so nuanced!

I never said URM boosts aren't logical. They're extremely logical if you support the cause. I was just pointing out how funny it is for me to watch all the URM proponents bash legacy admissions when it's not something they think is morally justified, when, it absolutely can be morally justified.

I also don't support it, as I've stated countless times.

Your posts reek of immaturity, go back to the playground.

 

[ChemEngMD]

Haha. This sounds familiar! Funny how your opinion changes. As long as you think it's fair to give people a bump, it's OK.

If you read all my posts in here you would see that I talked about ethics and what is ethically permissible for an individual. Some people would find this type of thing as ethically/morally wrong, others would see it as fine. I specified that there is no set black and white rule to this type of thing and it is up to the individual. Unlike medical ethics where we have some generally agreed upon guidelines for what is and is not ethical within the community, other segments of society do not have a standard for what is and is not ethical.

My personal opinion is that the rich/privileged helping the rich/privileged to become more rich/privileged is not something that fits into my ethical standards.

However, if it fits into someone else's then that is their prerogative.

 

[ridethecliche]

I never said URM boosts aren't logical. They're extremely logical if you support the cause. I was just pointing out how funny it is for me to watch all the URM proponents bash legacy admissions when it's not something they think is morally justified, when, it absolutely can be morally justified.

I also don't support it, as I've stated countless times.

Your posts reek of immaturity, go back to the playground.

I don't think you understand what a moral justification is. There is no morality in what you're saying. The reason that I think this is all hilarious on your end is that URM admissions and legacy admissions are at two opposite ends of the spectrum.

Also that awkward moment a pre-med calls a non-trad immature. Womp womp.

 

[velodork]

Seems like this thread has run its course. Thank you everyone for your feedback.