"Not a Meritocracy"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a sad state of affairs that educators are now openly saying we don’t have a meritocracy. What do we have? An oligarchy?

What we have is a college admissions process that was never designed to be a meritocracy. Is that a bad thing? No. Schools want what they want. Pick them accordingly.

Your child must be one of those benefited from this.

[Anonymous]

You are very naive OP. The heads say that every year as a defensive measure to stave off crazy rich parents. College admissions were never based on merit. Do you think it was fair when women + blacks could not even apply to elite colleges at least through the 1970s?

[Anonymous]

Hence, the side door.

[Anonymous]

OP is your child FGLI? Are they on significant financial aid? Are they a URM?

You seem to regard yourself as poorer or less knowledgeable about admissions than your child’s peers’ families.

[Anonymous]

Why are you asking here? How would we know? Ask your school; isn’t that what you’re paying for?

[Anonymous]

If it were a meritocracy these big 3 schools wouldn’t exist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Last week, the Head of School for our Big3 DC private reminded parents that college admissions is "not a meritocracy." He was not glib about this but seemed to be acknowledging it. He also said that the "college admissions system is broken.'

In the senior class this year, the kids of families with considerable money, privelege, and notoriety (as in nationally-known companies and public figures as well as 'old money') are doing really well in admissions. Really well. It's eye-opening and rather disgusting, considering what I know about the relative achievements of the kids (admittedly, I don't know all). But the overall results for the school is not good -- but for these kids, it's starkly good.

Are many schools seeing similar results -- along Wisconsin Avenue?

What are these families actually doing to help their applications?
Is it legacy?
The assumption (on behalf of colleges) that they will donate?
Promises of donations (by the families)?
Actual history of donations (by the families)?
Colleges just plain wanting the kids of CEOs (because it looks good or because they assume successful parent will equal
Successful kid)?

What exactly is putting these kids ahead? I'm curious how this works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it were a meritocracy these big 3 schools wouldn’t exist

+1000

[Anonymous]

OP -- I'm pretty sure we're not at the same school, but I know what school you're at and can even figure out some of the students you're referring to (for better or worse) because the DC-private school world is pretty small. At our DC private something similar is happening. There are a few stark examples of big money/name recognition kids getting into Ivies when their classmates with far better grades/scores, much more rigorous courseloads, and better ECs are not getting in. It's depressing, but it's a lesson for our kids about how unfair this world of ours is.

[Anonymous]

Tee hee. I’m pretty sure tuition at OPs big 3 WAY exceeds 50,000. Yes. Admissions depends on money. The rest of us public school kids already knew that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your child attends a $50,000/year private high school.

Yeah and for that kind of money I'd damn well expect a leg up on college admission compared to public school kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last week, the Head of School for our Big3 DC private reminded parents that college admissions is "not a meritocracy." He was not glib about this but seemed to be acknowledging it. He also said that the "college admissions system is broken.'

In the senior class this year, the kids of families with considerable money, privelege, and notoriety (as in nationally-known companies and public figures as well as 'old money') are doing really well in admissions. Really well. It's eye-opening and rather disgusting, considering what I know about the relative achievements of the kids (admittedly, I don't know all). But the overall results for the school is not good -- but for these kids, it's starkly good.

Are many schools seeing similar results -- along Wisconsin Avenue?

Ugh - I think this is our school - I missed two online lunches this week due to work commitments. I'm disappointed to hear this was a narrative.

This school cares far too much for the rich and is shockingly disinterested in others. It amazed me how few of us feel that anything we'd have to say would matter to them.

Why would you expect a school that costs so much that only rich people can afford it to be interested in not-rich people?

This is like saying "Armani New York Fifth Avenue is shockingly disinterested in people who shop at Kohl's".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your child attends a $50,000/year private high school.

Yeah and for that kind of money I'd damn well expect a leg up on college admission compared to public school kids.

Which is the definition of “not a meritocracy.”

[Anonymous]

What did you think private school tuition was for, OP? To buy college admissions and other advantages. Your child will benefit as well, even if not to the same extent. I know two families with sons who got admitted to SLACs this year PURELY due to efforts by their private schools (plus being full pay). Yes this makes me a bit bitter as someone whose child will never be that privileged, but at the end of the day, it's also a little pathetic for those kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your child attends a $50,000/year private high school.

Yeah and for that kind of money I'd damn well expect a leg up on college admission compared to public school kids.

Fine, but don’t kid yourself that there’s anything meritocratic about that.