Sidwell 2023 College outcomes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell 23 family. Definitely a tough year. Many seniors and families (us included) are starting to grow frustrated with Sidwell's grade deflation and feel like there should be some sort of change going forward to communicate to colleges the rigor of the curriculum and the rarity of "high" GPAs.

To some previous posters: yes, the majority of Ivies this year have been heavy, heavy legacy - think a parent with time on the board, generational legacy, that sort of thing. Yes, UChicago accepted a very very high number of students again this year, but many of those who have been accepted will most likely end up choosing others instead.

Public universities this year were very, very scary for Sidwell students: Wisco was arguably the biggest shocker of the year and rejected/waitlisted deserving students in droves. Much less success at Michigan this year as well.

Sidwell is still just as strong as (if not stronger than) in years past when it comes to highly selective LACS and did well with EDs there.

There are instructors at Sidwell who essentially NEVER give above a B+ on papers. So, students endlessly grind and wear themselves trying to get a decent grade in the class. What is Sidwell doing exactly?

^^ hopefully the administration is finally starting to see the negative effects of this with regards to college admissions

Umm, no they are not. We have two kids at Sidwell -- spaced a number of years apart. Older one graduated and younger DC has some time left. This has been a standard complaint about Sidwell for a while. School simply does not engage. Those interested should look at Dalton outcomes. They used to be just like Sidwell. Now, there is an ocean of a difference between the two schools.

Are there simply more legacy at Dalton?

Or are you saying Dalton has lowered its standards and is no longer “rigorous?”

No, def not saying that. I live in NYC and know a lot of Dalton parents. They all seem hooked.

Then why compare Dalton and Sidwell outcomes?

I'm not that poster. Someone else brought Dalton into the convo and compared the two schools' outcomes. I simply observed that there may be an even greater number of legacies at Dalton as there are at Sidwell. That's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Admissions has become a crapshoot for all kids whether private or public. This makes me think grade deflation is not the issue.
Colleges and universities are very familiar with schools like Sidwell and GDS. They know that the grading is very different from public schools.

TY! It's not like US colleges/universites have never heard of GDS/Sidwell and their grading styles. It's simply not true. Changing those grades are not going to change the admissions outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Would they consider ranking students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would they consider ranking students?

GDS ranking students? Does this not go against what GDS represents? Ranking is inherently not inclusive and equitable!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they consider ranking students?

GDS ranking students? Does this not go against what GDS represents? Ranking is inherently not inclusive and equitable!!

Agree. If they have a ranking, it got to be adjusted by race, income, gender, etc., so that the ranking is equitable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell 23 family. Definitely a tough year. Many seniors and families (us included) are starting to grow frustrated with Sidwell's grade deflation and feel like there should be some sort of change going forward to communicate to colleges the rigor of the curriculum and the rarity of "high" GPAs.

To some previous posters: yes, the majority of Ivies this year have been heavy, heavy legacy - think a parent with time on the board, generational legacy, that sort of thing. Yes, UChicago accepted a very very high number of students again this year, but many of those who have been accepted will most likely end up choosing others instead.

Public universities this year were very, very scary for Sidwell students: Wisco was arguably the biggest shocker of the year and rejected/waitlisted deserving students in droves. Much less success at Michigan this year as well.

Sidwell is still just as strong as (if not stronger than) in years past when it comes to highly selective LACS and did well with EDs there.

There are instructors at Sidwell who essentially NEVER give above a B+ on papers. So, students endlessly grind and wear themselves trying to get a decent grade in the class. What is Sidwell doing exactly?

^^ hopefully the administration is finally starting to see the negative effects of this with regards to college admissions

Umm, no they are not. We have two kids at Sidwell -- spaced a number of years apart. Older one graduated and younger DC has some time left. This has been a standard complaint about Sidwell for a while. School simply does not engage. Those interested should look at Dalton outcomes. They used to be just like Sidwell. Now, there is an ocean of a difference between the two schools.

Are there simply more legacy at Dalton?

Or are you saying Dalton has lowered its standards and is no longer “rigorous?”

No, def not saying that. I live in NYC and know a lot of Dalton parents. They all seem hooked.

DD goes to camp with girls who went to Dalton, Spence, Chapin, etc. These schools have wealthier parents than Sidwell hands down. I don’t think it’s just legacy, but probably some major donors.

How have the legacy kids done at Sidwell (non-major donor)?
Dalton is wealthier but not to the extent that large numbers of megadonors are getting their kids into school each year.

Legacy doesn't matter if the big donor part isn't paired with it. Just having a parent or parents who went to a school is virtually meaningless to the admissions offices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell 23 family. Definitely a tough year. Many seniors and families (us included) are starting to grow frustrated with Sidwell's grade deflation and feel like there should be some sort of change going forward to communicate to colleges the rigor of the curriculum and the rarity of "high" GPAs.

To some previous posters: yes, the majority of Ivies this year have been heavy, heavy legacy - think a parent with time on the board, generational legacy, that sort of thing. Yes, UChicago accepted a very very high number of students again this year, but many of those who have been accepted will most likely end up choosing others instead.

Public universities this year were very, very scary for Sidwell students: Wisco was arguably the biggest shocker of the year and rejected/waitlisted deserving students in droves. Much less success at Michigan this year as well.

Sidwell is still just as strong as (if not stronger than) in years past when it comes to highly selective LACS and did well with EDs there.

There are instructors at Sidwell who essentially NEVER give above a B+ on papers. So, students endlessly grind and wear themselves trying to get a decent grade in the class. What is Sidwell doing exactly?

^^ hopefully the administration is finally starting to see the negative effects of this with regards to college admissions

Umm, no they are not. We have two kids at Sidwell -- spaced a number of years apart. Older one graduated and younger DC has some time left. This has been a standard complaint about Sidwell for a while. School simply does not engage. Those interested should look at Dalton outcomes. They used to be just like Sidwell. Now, there is an ocean of a difference between the two schools.

Are there simply more legacy at Dalton?

Or are you saying Dalton has lowered its standards and is no longer “rigorous?”

No, def not saying that. I live in NYC and know a lot of Dalton parents. They all seem hooked.

DD goes to camp with girls who went to Dalton, Spence, Chapin, etc. These schools have wealthier parents than Sidwell hands down. I don’t think it’s just legacy, but probably some major donors.

NYC on average has more wealth than DC. Wall Street bonuses can be insane

+1 DC has plenty of well off Ivy alums who can pay private school tuition

NYC has more Ivy alums who can also be big donors to these schools

Regular legacy is pretty worthless per the stats that can out of the FAIR litigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My high stats DC was WL to several Top 15-30 schools that in the recent past (2021, 2022) they were strongly located in the 100% zone on SCOIR for Sidwell.

Not that we ever expected 100%, but striking out on so many of those was a clear change from the past - they were not alone in this sort of outcome.

In this same T15-30 in 100% SCOIR zone:
- one regular acceptance
- one acceptance via an alternative entry pathway (for example - late start/early start/abroad/satellite ).

Rejected in all Top 10 and Top SLAC applications.

Accepted to some safeties T40-T60 and a low SLAC.

DC was grateful to have some options. This year was a shift for sure.

When you say Top SLAC can you be more specific ?

Think along the lines of ....Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Swarthmore

Pomona too? It isn't as sought after locally, so I'd expect better luck. Outside of USNWR, it is rarely mentioned with the other 3 outside the west. What about Wellesley and Smith for the girls. Any luck there?

Pomona is absurdly hard to get in

Far fewer applicants from the DMV though. It and CMC should get more interest here. USNWR throwing them an occasional #3 might help though. However, it has also been #7 3 times in the 2000s and does still have a more regional name.

As PP said - Pomona is insanely hard and they have plenty of strong DMV applicants to choose from. The entire school is only 1800 kids.

Even smaller than that, 1700. Their first year class alone has 43 states and 51 nationalities represented among just 413 students. Their focus on diversity means there isn't room to enroll more than a handful of DMV kids. https://www.pomona.edu/news/2022/09/26-class-2026-new-sagehens-number

This is a helpful exercise for those with kids applying in the future (or wondering why their kids didn't get in.) Pomona offered spots to 15 (or fewer) students from Maryland this year. 23% are first gen, so on average that leaves 12 spots for students who aren't first gen. 62.5% are students of color, leaving 6 spots for white students, or 3 white men and 3 white women who aren't first gen. (https://www.pomona.edu/news/2023/03/17-introducing-pomona-college-class-2027)

Yes. We all need to understand that there's a quota system at work, and that your kid will be evaluated on his/her qualifications ONLY IN COMPARISON TO THE ASSIGNED REFERENCE GROUP. Never mind that your kid may be a way better candidate (aside from identity concerns) than all the other students in GROUP X. It doesn't matter, because your kid is a group Y.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My high stats DC was WL to several Top 15-30 schools that in the recent past (2021, 2022) they were strongly located in the 100% zone on SCOIR for Sidwell.

Not that we ever expected 100%, but striking out on so many of those was a clear change from the past - they were not alone in this sort of outcome.

In this same T15-30 in 100% SCOIR zone:
- one regular acceptance
- one acceptance via an alternative entry pathway (for example - late start/early start/abroad/satellite ).

Rejected in all Top 10 and Top SLAC applications.

Accepted to some safeties T40-T60 and a low SLAC.

DC was grateful to have some options. This year was a shift for sure.

When you say Top SLAC can you be more specific ?

Think along the lines of ....Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Swarthmore

Pomona too? It isn't as sought after locally, so I'd expect better luck. Outside of USNWR, it is rarely mentioned with the other 3 outside the west. What about Wellesley and Smith for the girls. Any luck there?

Pomona is absurdly hard to get in

Far fewer applicants from the DMV though. It and CMC should get more interest here. USNWR throwing them an occasional #3 might help though. However, it has also been #7 3 times in the 2000s and does still have a more regional name.

As PP said - Pomona is insanely hard and they have plenty of strong DMV applicants to choose from. The entire school is only 1800 kids.

Even smaller than that, 1700. Their first year class alone has 43 states and 51 nationalities represented among just 413 students. Their focus on diversity means there isn't room to enroll more than a handful of DMV kids. https://www.pomona.edu/news/2022/09/26-class-2026-new-sagehens-number

This is a helpful exercise for those with kids applying in the future (or wondering why their kids didn't get in.) Pomona offered spots to 15 (or fewer) students from Maryland this year. 23% are first gen, so on average that leaves 12 spots for students who aren't first gen. 62.5% are students of color, leaving 6 spots for white students, or 3 white men and 3 white women who aren't first gen. (https://www.pomona.edu/news/2023/03/17-introducing-pomona-college-class-2027)

Yes. We all need to understand that there's a quota system at work, and that your kid will be evaluated on his/her qualifications ONLY IN COMPARISON TO THE ASSIGNED REFERENCE GROUP. Never mind that your kid may be a way better candidate (aside from identity concerns) than all the other students in GROUP X. It doesn't matter, because your kid is a group Y.

Isn’t identity is part of what Sidwell & GDS preach?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to be crass, but I really don't see why schools wouldn't be falling over themselves to accept students who have excellent college preparation, come from a background with means, and a family who obviously values education. They are likely to be full-pay, donate to the school etc. My kids and I just went to public schools and we're not part of this "Big 3" world in any way, but even with all emphasis on increasing first gen, need blind, diversity etc. I would think at the end of the day schools would still reward the relatively small population of kids who go to top private schools with selective college admissions.

Agree. But as a parent of 3 "Big 3" graduates, I see why colleges are just as anxious to fill their classes with Big 3 graduates as those from urban no-name high schools. The Big 3 graduates are a "safe bet." They will contribute to the college community, excel after graduation, and will most likely become consistent and increasingly deep pocket donors.

It's not just the full pay. It's the fact that, as much as the whole first gen/POC/DEI pressures count, the colleges need a core of students who will reliably pay the bills, graduate on time, go on to successful careers, and develop into active and financially reliable alumni. The "Big 3" type of students fulfill that role with less risk than the other categories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's the same story at STA and NCS this year. Top but unhooked kids were the ones with the most disappointing admissions relative to their stats. Some slipped through and did ok; many did not. It was totally random whereas it used to be a relatively sure thing: if you had "this" high GPA, you could reasonably expect an admission to "this" group of schools. This year totally random for the highest kids.

Not much these schools can do about that except for the grade deflation. I honestly don't know why these schools do this since it only hurts their own students. NCS is also notorious for English classes where out of the entire grade, less than 5 kids will be given an A from the department. Why do this? You have rigorous admissions standards and they you give everyone Bs. It makes no sense.
I'm 100% sure that if these schools would bump all grading up by half a letter grade it would improve admissions. A bump of a full letter grade and they'd knock it out of the park. The kids would still do the same work, score the same on the AP exams and SATs--they would just have competitive GPAs! Amazing.

Is this true? My DD is at NCS and we did not hear this story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how much is impacted by their college profile? This is a link of the one I found via Google that I posted on another thread. If this is what they’re sending to colleges, they’re doing a disservice. There’s no GPA or standardized test metrics. College offices may assume a 3.6-3.7 is not that strong and everyone is earning a 4.0.

https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1668526756/sidwell/r6wrcvyaremtnq3fdvag/2022CollegeProfile0927.pdf

Not true. This is not what they send to colleges. That profile is much more detailed.

The mistake here is in believing that any if this matters anymore..

Unhooked kids on the "high rigor" track etc are doing no better than other solid students at the school w less impressive records.

This is the conclusion I seem to be seeing as well. A lesson learned this year is that it doesn't seem to matter if you take the hardest classes and get straight As or on-level classes and some Bs. The kids are getting into the same (non top 15) schools.

This is why my kid is saying too and it is playing out in the admissions results. Being in hardest classes with A/A- didn't result in a difference from kids in regular classes. We've seen many examples where the regular level class student is accepted and the high rigor student is WL or rejected. But I do think even the kids in the regular classes are seeing a slippage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would they consider ranking students?

GDS ranking students? Does this not go against what GDS represents? Ranking is inherently not inclusive and equitable!!

Agree. If they have a ranking, it got to be adjusted by race, income, gender, etc., so that the ranking is equitable.

Yes. That's the whole reason for the "test optional" movement. It allows the colleges to race-norm, in order to satisfy the DEI gods, without being quite so obvious about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to be crass, but I really don't see why schools wouldn't be falling over themselves to accept students who have excellent college preparation, come from a background with means, and a family who obviously values education. They are likely to be full-pay, donate to the school etc. My kids and I just went to public schools and we're not part of this "Big 3" world in any way, but even with all emphasis on increasing first gen, need blind, diversity etc. I would think at the end of the day schools would still reward the relatively small population of kids who go to top private schools with selective college admissions.

Agree. But as a parent of 3 "Big 3" graduates, I see why colleges are just as anxious to fill their classes with Big 3 graduates as those from urban no-name high schools. The Big 3 graduates are a "safe bet." They will contribute to the college community, excel after graduation, and will most likely become consistent and increasingly deep pocket donors.

It's not just the full pay. It's the fact that, as much as the whole first gen/POC/DEI pressures count, the colleges need a core of students who will reliably pay the bills, graduate on time, go on to successful careers, and develop into active and financially reliable alumni. The "Big 3" type of students fulfill that role with less risk than the other categories.

There are more than enough full pay families in the DMV to fill this role for schools. This is a wealthy and well educated area and MOST of the families that can be described this way are NOT in private, let alone Big 3 private. You are kidding yourselves if you think being a full pay, or even very wealthy Big 3 family is going to be "in high demand" by colleges to serve as the "fund source" at schools.

I'd also add that given the diversity of the DMV area, there are ALSO plenty of full pay qualified applicants who also fill schools' POC/DEI priorities. That means that for this region of the country, colleges can meet a variety of diversity goals without forging full pay students.

Then, add to that, that with a high level of educational opportunities in the DMV (public and private) - there will also be smart first gen, POC/DEI students from families with financial need that schools want to welcome to their school and give aid to support that.

In the end, there's only so many spots a school wants to offer to a given region. (I have no gripes with any of this...) It's just the way it is.

[Anonymous]

Aside but my kid got into Pomona off the waitlist from a top area private (Maret, Holton etc. level not big 3). He transferred to the bottom of the Ivy after a year. Think Penn Cornel Dartmouth level. Wanted to be in the East and nobody seems to know Pomona versus the Ivy has immediate recognition as you would expect. Buyer’s remorse?