Unhooked kids - Why is private HS worth the diminished chances for top college admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t hooked kids chances somewhat diminished too?

I think it's the opposite where the hooked kids' hooks would be elevated by being at the privates who spend more time on counseling, recommendations and helping kids position themselves in the best possible light.

[Anonymous]

Normally, kids at top privates were born to privileged parents who can confer legacy status hook + make periodic donations to the university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it any better when you have 50+ kids from some giant Moco public applying to the same Ivy? Genuinely curious.

Good question but I think it's because:
-Colleges will limit the number of kids they take from any one high school. Not a strict quota but they know how small the privates are.
-Privates have many more big donor and VIP legacies. Simple legacy means very little in the DMV--you often need to be a donor/VIP and the privates have a lot of these.
-Privates have a high percentage of sports recruits. They have to staff the same sports teams the publics do on a fraction of the student body. So there are far more athletes per capita.
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is a good analysis

It’s really not analysis. It’s a theory this person has created, but there’s no cited data to back it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it any better when you have 50+ kids from some giant Moco public applying to the same Ivy? Genuinely curious.

Good question but I think it's because:
-Colleges will limit the number of kids they take from any one high school. Not a strict quota but they know how small the privates are.
-Privates have many more big donor and VIP legacies. Simple legacy means very little in the DMV--you often need to be a donor/VIP and the privates have a lot of these.
-Privates have a high percentage of sports recruits. They have to staff the same sports teams the publics do on a fraction of the student body. So there are far more athletes per capita.
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is a good analysis

It’s really not analysis. It’s a theory this person has created, but there’s no cited data to back it up.

It's a good theoretical analysis

[Anonymous]

This stupid reasoning game is played by everyone who couldn't get into college they wanted (or feel deserved) - private parents, public parents, hook families, unhooked families, rich, poor...etc. End of the day, the bottom line is your kid didn't bring what the college was looking for. Accept that and move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Normally, kids at top privates were born to privileged parents who can confer legacy status hook + make periodic donations to the university.

How much does this actually matter? I went to Georgetown and DH went to Michigan. I assume that doesn’t really matter unless we were to make a very sizable donation to those schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it any better when you have 50+ kids from some giant Moco public applying to the same Ivy? Genuinely curious.

Good question but I think it's because:
-Colleges will limit the number of kids they take from any one high school. Not a strict quota but they know how small the privates are.
-Privates have many more big donor and VIP legacies. Simple legacy means very little in the DMV--you often need to be a donor/VIP and the privates have a lot of these.
-Privates have a high percentage of sports recruits. They have to staff the same sports teams the publics do on a fraction of the student body. So there are far more athletes per capita.
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is a good analysis

It’s really not analysis. It’s a theory this person has created, but there’s no cited data to back it up.

It's a good theoretical analysis

That’s not a thing. It’s also impossible to judge the merits of a theory unless you apply actual data to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is not true.

Uh oh! Looks like there might be problems with the “analysis.”

[Anonymous]

I have 3 children - 2 (one high-achieving, one with special needs) went through our highly-rated public, and the youngest (middle of the road student) is applying to private. College admissions is not driving our decision, but I think DS will be better off with more hands-on college counseling. DS is not getting into an Ivy, though, no matter where he goes to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is not true.

I think that PP is thinking of schools like Langley near where rich people live and that are mostly white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it any better when you have 50+ kids from some giant Moco public applying to the same Ivy? Genuinely curious.

Good question but I think it's because:
-Colleges will limit the number of kids they take from any one high school. Not a strict quota but they know how small the privates are.
-Privates have many more big donor and VIP legacies. Simple legacy means very little in the DMV--you often need to be a donor/VIP and the privates have a lot of these.
-Privates have a high percentage of sports recruits. They have to staff the same sports teams the publics do on a fraction of the student body. So there are far more athletes per capita.
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

This is a good analysis

It’s really not analysis. It’s a theory this person has created, but there’s no cited data to back it up.

It's a good theoretical analysis

In other words, pure conjecture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it any better when you have 50+ kids from some giant Moco public applying to the same Ivy? Genuinely curious.

Good question but I think it's because:
-Colleges will limit the number of kids they take from any one high school. Not a strict quota but they know how small the privates are.
-Privates have many more big donor and VIP legacies. Simple legacy means very little in the DMV--you often need to be a donor/VIP and the privates have a lot of these.
-Privates have a high percentage of sports recruits. They have to staff the same sports teams the publics do on a fraction of the student body. So there are far more athletes per capita.
-Privates also have a much higher URM ratio than most publics. At the top ones it's almost 50-50. These kids are gold for college admissions.

Whatever makes you feel better bud.

[Anonymous]

We do it for the 13 years of consistent education, the experience and connections made during those years and the community. Our public is too big, too anonymous, too many behavior problems and checked out parents. This is a gift to our children. The best education we could provide them and the environment to support a better childhood. I'm saying the quiet part out loud here- people are buying a prettier, calmer, more focused experience. It's not about college at all

[Anonymous]

First 13 years matter far more than the four years at college. I don’t need or necessarily want a top 25 school for DC. No one in our families went to a school in the top 25. All are very successful and happy. We have physicians, lawyers, vets and IT professionals in my cousin cohort. I don’t care where kids go to college. I do care where they spend their first 13 years as the develop into adults.