College admission: Public vs. private

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends OP. If you're talking suburban public, it's easier to get good grades. If you're talking urban public, most of the top colleges really respect a kid who can get good grades/scores coming from a "scruffy" school. For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

But that kid will have a hard time graduating college with good stats.

BS. Do you know these kids? What a rude assumption.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I do know them. It's a lot easier to do well when there is no competition. It's not rude, it's just the truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends OP. If you're talking suburban public, it's easier to get good grades. If you're talking urban public, most of the top colleges really respect a kid who can get good grades/scores coming from a "scruffy" school. For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

But that kid will have a hard time graduating college with good stats.

BS. Do you know these kids? What a rude assumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I do know them. It's a lot easier to do well when there is no competition. It's not rude, it's just the truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends OP. If you're talking suburban public, it's easier to get good grades. If you're talking urban public, most of the top colleges really respect a kid who can get good grades/scores coming from a "scruffy" school. For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

But that kid will have a hard time graduating college with good stats.

BS. Do you know these kids? What a rude assumption.

I have no pony in this race, but perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between and -- for my money - this is exactly why colleges should not abandon significant reliance on standardized testing. There certainly are issues with standardized tests, but they can also be a great equalizer in just these situations and others. Our DC did very well at a private that is not a Big X school -- great grades, presumably great recs, etc. Some may have questioned if they were warranted because of "less competition." But when the standardized tests show mastery over and again on subject mater tests, AP tests, or other national standards, it becomes quite clear that just because one school may see fewer outstanding students than another, it doesn't mean that the teachers can't recognize real talent or that they inflate their opinion of "run of the mill kids." The current debate on standardized tests focuses on whether they too narrowly exclude certain students or certain groups of students from being recognized for their potential, but they also can affirmatively allow students from urban publics and less known privates demonstrate that their education was on a par with the best suburban and big name private high schools. I cannot speak to the level of preparation for college from certain public schools, but I can confirm from personal experience that lesser known privates can do just a good of a job as those that many deem most prestigious.

[Anonymous]

To clarify, I was a new poster on this thread at 13:14.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I do know them. It's a lot easier to do well when there is no competition. It's not rude, it's just the truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really depends OP. If you're talking suburban public, it's easier to get good grades. If you're talking urban public, most of the top colleges really respect a kid who can get good grades/scores coming from a "scruffy" school. For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

But that kid will have a hard time graduating college with good stats.

BS. Do you know these kids? What a rude assumption.

Ok, so your assumption that there's no competition at Wilson and Walls is what's rude. And re truth, sometimes the absence of competition actually raises standards. Smart, ambitious kid aspires to do something well vs. better than the other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

Parent of a "Big 3" student with lots of friends at Wilson and Walls. I know you were trying to be complimentary, but it comes off as patronizing. The students who do well at Walls and Wilson would do equally well at any of the selective private schools. They certainly wouldn't be run of the mill. Smart driven children are going to thrive anywhere that they are offered the opportunity to shine, regardless of their parents' ability to pay $40k/year.

+1 -- from another parent of grads/students at Big 3 with friends at Wilson and Walls and Ellington

[Anonymous]

I will tell you, I think the problem is when the kids coming from publics, where they were not in heated competition with a large part of the rest of their class, tend to have a problem is when they are suddenly in at an elite college and not a shining star for the first time and/or the first time they fail at something in college. Kids coming from top privates have usually had both things happen to them before and have learned how to deal. Kids at the top at a middle road public rarely do. I speak from experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will tell you, I think the problem is when the kids coming from publics, where they were not in heated competition with a large part of the rest of their class, tend to have a problem is when they are suddenly in at an elite college and not a shining star for the first time and/or the first time they fail at something in college. Kids coming from top privates have usually had both things happen to them before and have learned how to deal. Kids at the top at a middle road public rarely do. I speak from experience.

I agree with you. My DD at a Big 3 is reminded all the time she is not the best at everything - or anything, really. I love that she gets this lesson early in life. It's humbling.

[Anonymous]

Yes, smart driven kids will probably do about the same anywhere. Sometimes I think that the best "value" in private, is for the other types of students. I have 3 kids in private and I feel like the one who benefits the most is my smart but not so naturally studious DS. He won't be headed to an Ivy but he should have great college options and I'm not sure that would have been the case had he gone to a large public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, smart driven kids will probably do about the same anywhere. Sometimes I think that the best "value" in private, is for the other types of students. I have 3 kids in private and I feel like the one who benefits the most is my smart but not so naturally studious DS. He won't be headed to an Ivy but he should have great college options and I'm not sure that would have been the case had he gone to a large public.

Agreed. Not just great college options, but also an understanding of how to work really hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It really depends OP. If you're talking suburban public, it's easier to get good grades. If you're talking urban public, most of the top colleges really respect a kid who can get good grades/scores coming from a "scruffy" school. For example, I know kids who graduated from Wilson H.S. and SWW in DC who did well for college acceptance. They would have been 'run of the mill' kids in private.

Depends on the suburban public school.

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/private-vs-public-no-advantage/2011/11/16/gIQAfMlSTN_blog.html

Someone looked at it in DC. It didn't make a difference.

[Anonymous]

Might "elite private high school" project to these colleges the likelihood of "full pay". I think yes. So, I think there could be some advantage. But many elite private high schools offer a superb education, so you have that.

[Anonymous]

I have two children at Duke; one graduated from a private and the other graduated from a MoCo public school. No functional difference, except the college advising was better at the private school.

[Anonymous]

They probably do better than Wilson, but not better than SWW.