Public School Kid Has MUCH Better Ivy Chances Than Private School Kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Nope. You cannot based on percentage because you don't know how many apply to Ivy+ schools. Not every student student apply to them.
TJ sends lot more students to Ivy+ than Sidwell.

I would think knowing the number of applications out to Ivies would actually hurt TJ not help because Sidwell (and other privates for this matter) pushes choosing the right schools to apply to, often limiting the number of Ivy apps per student (and not all Sidwell students apply to the Ivies.). Meanwhile, public schools tend to take more of a shoot your shot method and don't push kids to limit the number of Ivies they apply to.,,

You don't what you're talking about. Not too many public schools students apply to Ivies. Percentage-wise (to borrow y'all favorite word), private schools students apply in higher numbers to the ivies than public schools students.
For example, Blair had a graduating class of over 700 students last year, only 48 applied to Harvard, 67 to Yale and 69 to Princeton.

That isn't proving your point, cause all of those are significantly higher than number of apps Sidwell sent to those schools. Specifically HYP requires that if you do early action with them, you have to choose one, making HYP your tightest numbers of applications. So why don't you go ahead and give us a full count of Ivy+ applications from Blair.

Will you be able to give us a full count of Ivy+ applications from Sidwell?

I don't currently have access to do so, but perhaps someone else does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Nope. You cannot based on percentage because you don't know how many apply to Ivy+ schools. Not every student student apply to them.
TJ sends lot more students to Ivy+ than Sidwell.

I absolutely can and will compare the percentage of Ivy matriculants, from TJ and Sidwell. Not every student at Sidwell applies to an Ivy either (contrary to popular belief).

I don’t know about past years, but TJ isn’t sending a higher percentage than Sidwell to Ivy+ schools THIS year (the plus being UChicago, Stanford, Duke, and MIT). Before you respond (and your blood pressure rises), you should know that Sidwell is sending almost 12% of the c/o 2026 to UChicago alone. Please rest—you’re not going to win this argument.

And how many are they sending to MIT? :lol:

You’re not going to win a losing argument by deflecting. UChicago is as Ivy PLUS as MIT. But if you want to play that game, let’s compare the percentage of students from TJ and Sidwell attending Ivies and Ivy+ schools this year. TJ loses in both cases.

Fun fact: Sidwell has 125 seniors, and TJ has ~520 seniors. Forget percentages, just based on raw numbers, Sidwell is sending almost the same number of students to Ivies as TJ. 👀

No, they don’t. But keep dreaming.

Yes, they do. But keep coping. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Nope. You cannot based on percentage because you don't know how many apply to Ivy+ schools. Not every student student apply to them.
TJ sends lot more students to Ivy+ than Sidwell.

I absolutely can and will compare the percentage of Ivy matriculants, from TJ and Sidwell. Not every student at Sidwell applies to an Ivy either (contrary to popular belief).

I don’t know about past years, but TJ isn’t sending a higher percentage than Sidwell to Ivy+ schools THIS year (the plus being UChicago, Stanford, Duke, and MIT). Before you respond (and your blood pressure rises), you should know that Sidwell is sending almost 12% of the c/o 2026 to UChicago alone. Please rest—you’re not going to win this argument.

It is very difficult for any public school with a graduating class of 500+ to compete on a per capita basis with a top private school that has a graduating class of 120.
Sidwell has an admission rate under 10% so there are a lot of very bright kids there.
Sidwell also attracts the children of VIPs (like presidents and princes) because they are used to dealing with the children of VIPs. These children can often go to any college they want.
These private schools are the epicenters of privilege and like it or not, that privilege gives them more ways to be attractive to top colleges.

Even if Sidwell only sent 1 kid to each of the top 20, it would be over 15%. And they usually send at least 1 if not more to all top 20 that doesn't have the word technology in their name.
TJ might send 100 kids to top 20 schools. Unless your kid is attending a title 1 school, private schools are more likely to send you to a top college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmmmm...hard to believe.

No it’s fact.

Public’s do better college admissions

I love it when morons pay for Catholic schools and they end up at tiny colleges not ivies not good colleges crap one’s

Non-selective catholic schools don't change the equation much but cathedral and St. Albans send grads to top 20 at much higher rates than publics.

Nobody is sending their kid to the local catholic school to go to harvard. They are trying to avoid the bad influences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I call bull****. In 2025, Jackson-Reed didn't send a single student to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. PolarisList.com . If you are just going to make up stuff, you have to keep your claims vague and not capable of easy verification.

Given that Jackson-Reed doesn't send ANY students to Harvard, Princeton or MIT, your DC's chances there are essentially zero. Granted, your DC's chances at a top private are maybe only 3 percent, but those private school chances are still better. Each family has to decide for itself whether a nominal increase in chance is worth a few hundred thousand dollars, but it is b.sh__ that chances are better in publics, even in top publics.

JR has at least one student going to Princeton this year.

Even if you accept this rumor, 1 in a graduating class of 500 would be awful results.

The overwhelming majority of privates get 0/500 into Princeton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I call bull****. In 2025, Jackson-Reed didn't send a single student to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. PolarisList.com . If you are just going to make up stuff, you have to keep your claims vague and not capable of easy verification.

Given that Jackson-Reed doesn't send ANY students to Harvard, Princeton or MIT, your DC's chances there are essentially zero. Granted, your DC's chances at a top private are maybe only 3 percent, but those private school chances are still better. Each family has to decide for itself whether a nominal increase in chance is worth a few hundred thousand dollars, but it is b.sh__ that chances are better in publics, even in top publics.

No the stats do not lie they are published by public schools

Public’s always have a better record


Absolutely absurd to send your kid to a private for college admissions unless you are uber wealthy with major connections like the Kushner or trumps lol


Mine graduated from MCPS all Ivy acceptances all accepted at places like MIT places like Michigan or UNC or Georgia Tech etc

Where exactly do you see these published stats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So a public school parent came into the private school forum with this PSA?

We don't care.

And that's not sour grapes. The ivies have devolved into a false idol for spelling bee winning strivers and first gen kids destined go into debt and develop inferiority complexes.

This is def a private school parent. So tired of friends who go private telling me I’m “gaming the system,” by staying in public. They’re obsessed with college outcomes and think they’re owed it because they spent a shit-ton of $$ on MS and HS.

They would literally have been better off sending their kid to public and putting the money in the SP500 and presenting the school with a development check for $2,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Admissions to Ivy League colleges, especially in the context of legacy admissions, do not say much about the quality of the school. But of course, you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

1). The idea that TJ’s kids are non legacy and only Sidwells are is completely ludicrous.

2). The idea that the Harvard legacy kids are all slackers and only getting in to Harvard because they are legacies is also completely ludicrous. Have you met any Harvard alumni slacker kids from the DC area at TJ or Sidwell getting in to Harvard? These kids are workaholics who have are typically some of the highest achievers in the class.

DP

Legacy makes a big difference.

A highly qualified non-legacy might have a 1 in 6 lottery chance of admission but that same applciant with legacy prefernece wouild have a 50/50 chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Admissions to Ivy League colleges, especially in the context of legacy admissions, do not say much about the quality of the school. But of course, you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

And you are free to believe whatever makes you feel better about not being able to send your children to an elite private school. You’re completely delusional if you think all of Sidwell’s Ivy admits are legacies (or recruited athletes). As I said before—pure cope.

DP, if you excluded legacies, athletes and the children of VIP, the admit rate probably drops in half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I call bull****. In 2025, Jackson-Reed didn't send a single student to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. PolarisList.com . If you are just going to make up stuff, you have to keep your claims vague and not capable of easy verification.

Given that Jackson-Reed doesn't send ANY students to Harvard, Princeton or MIT, your DC's chances there are essentially zero. Granted, your DC's chances at a top private are maybe only 3 percent, but those private school chances are still better. Each family has to decide for itself whether a nominal increase in chance is worth a few hundred thousand dollars, but it is b.sh__ that chances are better in publics, even in top publics.

JR has at least one student going to Princeton this year.

Even if you accept this rumor, 1 in a graduating class of 500 would be awful results.

The overwhelming majority of privates get 0/500 into Princeton.

And yet Sidwell, GDS, STA, NCS, Maret, WIS, Bullis, and Potomac all manage to keep Princeton on their 4 year matriculation list multiple times over... and oh yea 4 years would put them right at the 500 mark for the most part... 🤔

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So a public school parent came into the private school forum with this PSA?

We don't care.

And that's not sour grapes. The ivies have devolved into a false idol for spelling bee winning strivers and first gen kids destined go into debt and develop inferiority complexes.

This is def a private school parent. So tired of friends who go private telling me I’m “gaming the system,” by staying in public. They’re obsessed with college outcomes and think they’re owed it because they spent a shit-ton of $$ on MS and HS.

They would literally have been better off sending their kid to public and putting the money in the SP500 and presenting the school with a development check for $2,000,000

Better off at what? Being Scrooge McDuck or actually living their best life and giving their kids the best chance in life... cause I don't care to be Scrooge McDucking it, life is meant to be lived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Nope. You cannot based on percentage because you don't know how many apply to Ivy+ schools. Not every student student apply to them.
TJ sends lot more students to Ivy+ than Sidwell.

I absolutely can and will compare the percentage of Ivy matriculants, from TJ and Sidwell. Not every student at Sidwell applies to an Ivy either (contrary to popular belief).

I don’t know about past years, but TJ isn’t sending a higher percentage than Sidwell to Ivy+ schools THIS year (the plus being UChicago, Stanford, Duke, and MIT). Before you respond (and your blood pressure rises), you should know that Sidwell is sending almost 12% of the c/o 2026 to UChicago alone. Please rest—you’re not going to win this argument.

And how many are they sending to MIT? :lol:

You’re not going to win a losing argument by deflecting. UChicago is as Ivy PLUS as MIT. But if you want to play that game, let’s compare the percentage of students from TJ and Sidwell attending Ivies and Ivy+ schools this year. TJ loses in both cases.

Fun fact: Sidwell has 125 seniors, and TJ has ~520 seniors. Forget percentages, just based on raw numbers, Sidwell is sending almost the same number of students to Ivies as TJ. 👀

DP

You can't just count instagram posts when almost EVERY Sidwell senior has posted (114) compared to TJ where a quarter of the students have posted (142).

And you can't assume that the traditional ivy+ are the top targets for STEM students at TJ.
Carnegie mellon and UIUC are preferred destinations over Dartmouth or Brown.
GA Tech is more desirable than most of the Ivy+
Schools like Michigan and even Purdue might be more desirable than most of the Ivy+
Sidwell doesn't send a lot of kids to MIT and the stanford/princeton admits tend to be more humanities focused.

If you want yourt kid to go to ivy+, then sidwell is probably a better pick than TJ.

if your kid is into STEM then TJ is probably better for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

You are delusional to think or suggest that Elite Prep's admissions model is remotely representative of top private school student bodies.

At most places, more than half the students were admitted before the age of 10 (i.e., at most, limited academic track records). Most of these younger admits had hooks. Either a parent attended the school, they have a sibling at the school, and/or they have a parent working at the school. Some of these kids may just happen to be "smart" in the way you've used it above, but most are not. At most Big 3-type middle schools, there are only a handful of true academic superstars in each grade. The rest are mostly from well-off families and likely decent-ish students, but not at all in the 3.8+ GPA/1500+ SAT mold. Way more of these are admitted for 9th grade, but still not that many.

In other words, you are grossly overestimating the percentage of students at top privates schools (especially the lifers or near-lifers) who are "smart" enough to have a legitimate shot at elite universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I call bull****. In 2025, Jackson-Reed didn't send a single student to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. PolarisList.com . If you are just going to make up stuff, you have to keep your claims vague and not capable of easy verification.

Given that Jackson-Reed doesn't send ANY students to Harvard, Princeton or MIT, your DC's chances there are essentially zero. Granted, your DC's chances at a top private are maybe only 3 percent, but those private school chances are still better. Each family has to decide for itself whether a nominal increase in chance is worth a few hundred thousand dollars, but it is b.sh__ that chances are better in publics, even in top publics.

JR has at least one student going to Princeton this year.

Even if you accept this rumor, 1 in a graduating class of 500 would be awful results.

The overwhelming majority of privates get 0/500 into Princeton.

And yet Sidwell, GDS, STA, NCS, Maret, WIS, Bullis, and Potomac all manage to keep Princeton on their 4 year matriculation list multiple times over... and oh yea 4 years would put them right at the 500 mark for the most part... 🤔

Are you under the impression that TJ doesn't?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I call bull****. In 2025, Jackson-Reed didn't send a single student to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. PolarisList.com . If you are just going to make up stuff, you have to keep your claims vague and not capable of easy verification.

Given that Jackson-Reed doesn't send ANY students to Harvard, Princeton or MIT, your DC's chances there are essentially zero. Granted, your DC's chances at a top private are maybe only 3 percent, but those private school chances are still better. Each family has to decide for itself whether a nominal increase in chance is worth a few hundred thousand dollars, but it is b.sh__ that chances are better in publics, even in top publics.

JR has at least one student going to Princeton this year.

Even if you accept this rumor, 1 in a graduating class of 500 would be awful results.

The overwhelming majority of privates get 0/500 into Princeton.

And yet Sidwell, GDS, STA, NCS, Maret, WIS, Bullis, and Potomac all manage to keep Princeton on their 4 year matriculation list multiple times over... and oh yea 4 years would put them right at the 500 mark for the most part... 🤔

Are you under the impression that TJ doesn't?

Why do people not read the quote that people are responding to? I was responding to a comment about private schools, not TJ (a public school)... and while I believe TJ students do get in, not nearly percentage wise as the top privates.