Is it true that Sidwell students don't graduate with a GPA?

[Anonymous]

I think it depends a lot on the public school. The top 30-50% at Whitman and other top area public schools are not going to community college unless they choose to because of finances.

[Anonymous]

And I would hesitate before putting Duke, Williams, etc. in the category of schools that middle-of-the-class students at Sidwell can get into. Getting into these colleges has gotten MUCH more competitive than when we (assuming you are 35-50) were in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And I would hesitate before putting Duke, Williams, etc. in the category of schools that middle-of-the-class students at Sidwell can get into. Getting into these colleges has gotten MUCH more competitive than when we (assuming you are 35-50) were in school.

So the media suggests. But are there more kids now than then? Are kids smarter? I'm skeptical. Yeah, there's grade inflation and the SATs have been re-normed a few times and the scale changed, so you could say it takes a higher GPA and a higher SAT to get in now than it did then. Arguably, it's somewhat more meritocratic now than it was then (e.g. the gentleman's C doesn't cut it anymore) and certainly kids apply to more schools now than they did then (so the one out of ____ admissions stats are more impressive), but do you have to know more, be smarter, or work harder now than you did then, all else (e.g. legacy status, school rank) being equal?

[Anonymous]

Yes, there are more students applying to colleges these days than 20 years ago. 2008 I think was one of the largest pools of college applicants ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, there are more students applying to colleges these days than 20 years ago. 2008 I think was one of the largest pools of college applicants ever.

But is that because there are more kids in this cohort or because a greater % of kids (in a similar-sized or smaller cohort) now go to college. It seems like college is the new high school. College used to be for people who were academically inclined or affluent. Now it's for everyone. Doesn't mean it's harder to get in.

[Anonymous]

Looks like there more births in 1960 than in 1990; 1963-89 was a comparative slump.

So those of us closest to 50 had a similar-sized cohort as the current one. But the current cohort is larger than your cohort was if you're in your mid-40s or younger.

[Anonymous]

For the skeptic poster - Williams has a detailed look at admissions stats on their website. Applications have soared just in the last 10-15 years. Admissions rates have plummeted during that time. So assuming that many of the additional applicants are as qualified as the base group then it is definitely harder to get in. Also you may want to take a look at the incredible SAT, GPA and other stats for incoming classes at the top colleges (not just the ivy league). It is eye opening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the skeptic poster - Williams has a detailed look at admissions stats on their website. Applications have soared just in the last 10-15 years. Admissions rates have plummeted during that time. So assuming that many of the additional applicants are as qualified as the base group then it is definitely harder to get in. Also you may want to take a look at the incredible SAT, GPA and other stats for incoming classes at the top colleges (not just the ivy league). It is eye opening.

My daughter is a rising junior in high school. it has been eye-opening to witness how her older peers have navigated applying to a wide range of colleges and how competitive college entry has become. Here in Virginia, even schools that were once considered "safety" schools are no longer the quick walk through the entry process they once were. We are trying hard not to allow the anxiety of finding a college cloud the enjoyment of her last 2 years of high school, but truthfully, I am nervous about the situation.

[Anonymous]

PP - we just went through this process last year and my son applied to a variety of schools and actually got accepted everywhere (very bizarre). He's also not an athlete or a class president or a brilliant writer, just a good kid who works hard and knows who he is as a person.

A few thoughts:

1) Teacher recs - it's very important that the teachers who write your child's recommendations really "get" your kid and that they genuinely like them. Just b/c a child gets a good grade in a class doesn't mean the teacher will be able to say anything memorable about them.

2) Essay - your child needs to write about something they're passionate about and have a point and anecdote. It doesn't have to be about saving the environment, it can be about a spiritual moment alone, a reaction to a moving poem or why she hates the color pink. Once again, something that shows their personality, soul and passion.

3) Apply to a few private liberal arts colleges. Yes, they're more expensive but they also have wonderful financial aid that sometimes make them a great deal.

4) Most people know this but she needs to show the college that's she's interested by visiting, building a relationship with the admissions person she meets, check in, email, ask questions of them, etc.

I know this is terribly off topic but thought it might help

Why isn't there a Forum for College Bound Kids?

[Anonymous]

Thanks for perspective PP. While I like the idea of a college forum, since like the earlier PP I have a rising junior, I would worry that it would become as insane as the private school forum. And it seems like when this topic comes up the most opinionated people are basing it on their own experience rather than what the process is like today.

[Anonymous]

On a % admit basis, Williams has been one of the 5 hardest colleges to gain acceptance to for over 20 years. And the applicant pool for Williams traditionally has been the same as any Ivy League school. Anyone who puts schools like Duke and Williams as somehow lower or easier to get into quite simply does not know what they are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the skeptic poster - Williams has a detailed look at admissions stats on their website. Applications have soared just in the last 10-15 years. Admissions rates have plummeted during that time. So assuming that many of the additional applicants are as qualified as the base group then it is definitely harder to get in. Also you may want to take a look at the incredible SAT, GPA and other stats for incoming classes at the top colleges (not just the ivy league). It is eye opening.

NP here. I don't disagree that Williams and Duke are great schools, and I'm sure college admissions have gotten a lot more competitive in the last 10-20 years. However, I'm not sure the admissions statistics argument is so clear-cut. I just pulled up recent admission stats for a few colleges:

% of applicants admitted
Duke 22.7%
Williams 19.1%
Cornell 20.4%
Penn 16.4%
Brown 13.3%
Dartmouth 13.2%
Columbia 10.0%
Princeton 9.3%
Yale 8.3%
Harvard 7.1%

[Anonymous]

6:17 again. I just realized that the stats I pulled were from two different sites, and there is some small disparity between the numbers. If you use college.mychances.net (which seems to be pretty good), the Duke & Williams numbers above are correct, but each of the Ivy schools should be about 1-2% higher.

[Anonymous]

Stats alone don't tell the whole story. Quality of the applicant pool is another factor. (I'm skipping the legacy/athlete part for the moment, factors though they are.)
Since several schools such a Harvard are 1) supremely well known and 2) have said they will met the financial need of any accepted student, the applications have jumped. That doesn't necessarily mean they have jumped to pools of equally excellent students. Also, the biggest names get the most foreign applicants, so that boosts the apps and lowers the acceptance rate. If Harvard gets 400 foreign apps and Williams get 100, it doesn't mean Williams 100 are lesser qualified. And no, I have no personal connection with Williams.

[Anonymous]

Skeptical poster again. re It's harder to get in now then it was when we applied; don't assume the middle of the class at Sidwell gets in anymore.

Perhaps it would help to break this down, so it's clear what's producing the different impressions.

1. Harder for whom? When I applied to college, it would have been harder for someone like me to get in -- a lower middle class white girl who was first generation college coming from a high school that had never sent anyone to either of the two Ivies I applied to -- than it would now. At a really basic level, the ratio of men to women at my college was 2:1 at the time; now, women are the majority.

What happened in the meanwhile is admissions became more meritocratic and less old-boy network. There are now more spots available for candidates like I was --and the people like me category would include white women and people of color as well as non-local working class kids generally.

(As an aside, I think there's been some trickle down to the private elementary/secondary schools in the sense that the middle of the class at Sidwell now is not the same as it was in 1978. But I'd also guess that while previous racial and gender preferences have yielded to merit, the economic/geographical mix hasn't changed nearly as much -- a higher percentage of upper middle class (vs. rich and famous), perhaps (and maybe more suburbanites, some of whom are further away), but not a lot more scholarship kids because private secondary schools don't have the endowments/resources for financial aid that private colleges do and, of course, most parents want their kids at home in these years.)

2. Harder than when? I'm part of a cohort that's bigger than last year's baby boomlet. Many of you are not. Most of your kids won't be -- 2008 or right around there is supposed to be the peak for the baby boomlet entering college.

So, perhaps, we're making different comparisons. The high school class of 78 and of 88 had different experiences. 88 was smaller (than 78 and 08) and elite college admissions had moved further down the path toward meritocracy in 88 than in had in 78.

3. Harder where? Overall, supply has risen with demand for college. There are more colleges and some established colleges have increased their class sizes.

As suggested, I looked at the Williams stats. It's still a safety school for lots of applicants (only 42% of those admitted accept vs. something like 3/4 at Harvard) and it gets only about a quarter (27%) of the applications Harvard does. Maybe the Common Application makes Williams a safety school for more and better college applicants, but that may well mean that more middle-of-the-class affluent private school kids are enrolling than previously.

4. Where do kids in the middle of the class at Sidwell end up in college? I haven't seen Sidwell's list, but I have seen our school's. Little or no mediocrity on it. The occasional idiosyncratic pick, yes, but all good schools. Interestingly, we apparently had a great year in 2008. So I'm not sure that larger pool necessarily hurt elite private schools. (But numbers are so small that it could just be a particularly talented and/or well-connected group of kids).

My other perspective on this is interviewing for an Ivy and talking to friends who do it for other Ivies. Lots of kids who apply don't have a prayer. They're good kids (and some are obviously hard-working and ambitious) but there's nothing exceptional about them. And the kids like these that we knew in HS would never have applied to these schools, knowing they were out of reach.

I think college admissions is in a state of flux right now -- the threat that endowments will be taxed if a greater % of them aren't devoted to financial aid is an interesting development. It's not clear when/whether/by whom Early Action, Early Decision, the Common Application will be abandoned but they aren't working well for everyone. As affirmative action comes under increasing attack, there's more awareness of legacy admissions. And, of course, if admissions get more meritocratic, within a couple of decades, the kids of those admits constitute a demographically different pool of legacy candidate than previously.

I'm not sure how it'll all shake out, but, then again, I'm not too worried about it. For the already privileged kids at places like Sidwell, not a whole lot (aside from ego, often parental, it seems) is at stake in the college admissions process. What you bring to college matters more than what college you go to and all of the colleges these kids go to are places where you can get a good education and/or the credentials to go to a decent grad/professional school.