Admission process transparency

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty well accepted that admissions rate to the most competitive schools are between 5% and 20% depending on the entry year. Maret has in their school profile that theirs is 12% across the school - likely higher in the lower school and lower in the upper school.

It's reasonable to extrapolate that St. Albans, GDS, NCS, Potomac and Sidwell are roughly roughly roughly in the same general ballpark.

Now that you know that, has it changed your strategy on applying?

Unfortunately data such as “roughly roughly in the same ballpark” of what is “widely known” is not helpful and is literally just made up guesses

It's worse than that.

The 5% or 10% or 20% are Averages.

That might be useful if all the applicants were equal. But they are not. Some are advantaged and the rates of admission for these applicants is higher than the average. Which means that the rates of admission for those who are not advantaged is lower than the mean percent.

Examples of advantage include siblings, legacies, faculty kids, athletes, academic stars, graduates of "feeder" schools, full pay, kids of the rich and famous, and URMs. The more of these boxes you DC checks, the higher the probability they will be admitted. Admission of these kids isn't automatic, but as a group their rates of admission are higher than average.

The good news for applicants without even one of these advantages is that the number of applicants is:

1. Reported by the Admissions Office which is incented to make the number as high as possible.
2. The result of an energetic campaign to drive up the number of applications through Open Houses, Admissions presentations at feeder schools, and the efforts of alumni, current parents, coaches, and other boosters of the school.

This effort isn't targeted at highly-qualified applicants. The idea is to get as many applications as possible.

Got it. So you’re looking to rationalize why your normal kid didn’t get in to whatever they were rejected from. It must be that kids like him/her (however and whomever he/she is) didn’t stand a chance because of all of the other preferred kids that got in base on connections, race, athleticism, intellectualism or anything else.

Not PP, but I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school (assuming that admissions were done fairly). Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.

Are you saying full transparency is the only way to show admissions were done fairly? Can you define “fairly”?Do you think you know enough about running a school to know what is good/bad for the school? What is your experience running a school?

This is what I said : “I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school”

No need for enhanced interrogation techniques.

And you said

“Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.”

Seems you don’t like discussing what you said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty well accepted that admissions rate to the most competitive schools are between 5% and 20% depending on the entry year. Maret has in their school profile that theirs is 12% across the school - likely higher in the lower school and lower in the upper school.

It's reasonable to extrapolate that St. Albans, GDS, NCS, Potomac and Sidwell are roughly roughly roughly in the same general ballpark.

Now that you know that, has it changed your strategy on applying?

Unfortunately data such as “roughly roughly in the same ballpark” of what is “widely known” is not helpful and is literally just made up guesses

It's worse than that.

The 5% or 10% or 20% are Averages.

That might be useful if all the applicants were equal. But they are not. Some are advantaged and the rates of admission for these applicants is higher than the average. Which means that the rates of admission for those who are not advantaged is lower than the mean percent.

Examples of advantage include siblings, legacies, faculty kids, athletes, academic stars, graduates of "feeder" schools, full pay, kids of the rich and famous, and URMs. The more of these boxes you DC checks, the higher the probability they will be admitted. Admission of these kids isn't automatic, but as a group their rates of admission are higher than average.

The good news for applicants without even one of these advantages is that the number of applicants is:

1. Reported by the Admissions Office which is incented to make the number as high as possible.
2. The result of an energetic campaign to drive up the number of applications through Open Houses, Admissions presentations at feeder schools, and the efforts of alumni, current parents, coaches, and other boosters of the school.

This effort isn't targeted at highly-qualified applicants. The idea is to get as many applications as possible.

Got it. So you’re looking to rationalize why your normal kid didn’t get in to whatever they were rejected from. It must be that kids like him/her (however and whomever he/she is) didn’t stand a chance because of all of the other preferred kids that got in base on connections, race, athleticism, intellectualism or anything else.

Not PP, but I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school (assuming that admissions were done fairly). Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.

Are you saying full transparency is the only way to show admissions were done fairly? Can you define “fairly”?Do you think you know enough about running a school to know what is good/bad for the school? What is your experience running a school?

This is what I said : “I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school”

No need for enhanced interrogation techniques.

And you said

“Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.”

Seems you don’t like discussing what you said.

I am glad that you can read. However, You can work on asking questions related to the post and not random unrelated questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Admissions decisions at these schools is much more subjective than many know. The school is attempting to put together a class that satisfies the disparate needs of the interests on campus.

Publishing the data will only make their jobs harder and take the Admissions process in a direction they are not interested in taking.

Yeah, but we deserve to know. Just like how, when you apply to a job, the company sends you the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process, getting to the interview stage, etc. I don't know why private schools get away with being so opaque when everyone else has to be so open.

Um, this is not universal. Do they compile this info (half-assedly) in case they get sued? Sure. That's different that displaying a spreadsheet to the world alongside every job opening

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Admissions decisions at these schools is much more subjective than many know. The school is attempting to put together a class that satisfies the disparate needs of the interests on campus.

Publishing the data will only make their jobs harder and take the Admissions process in a direction they are not interested in taking.

Yeah, but we deserve to know. Just like how, when you apply to a job, the company sends you the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process, getting to the interview stage, etc. I don't know why private schools get away with being so opaque when everyone else has to be so open.

Um, this is not universal. Do they compile this info (half-assedly) in case they get sued? Sure. That's different that displaying a spreadsheet to the world alongside every job opening

There is something magic called LinkedIn. Check it out, maybe you will learn something about the profile of the people selected for a specific position. Of course, this is more prevalent in white collar jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Admissions decisions at these schools is much more subjective than many know. The school is attempting to put together a class that satisfies the disparate needs of the interests on campus.

Publishing the data will only make their jobs harder and take the Admissions process in a direction they are not interested in taking.

Yeah, but we deserve to know. Just like how, when you apply to a job, the company sends you the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process, getting to the interview stage, etc. I don't know why private schools get away with being so opaque when everyone else has to be so open.

Um, this is not universal. Do they compile this info (half-assedly) in case they get sued? Sure. That's different that displaying a spreadsheet to the world alongside every job opening

There is something magic called LinkedIn. Check it out, maybe you will learn something about the profile of the people selected for a specific position. Of course, this is more prevalent in white collar jobs.

Are you a bot? LinkedIn doesn't provide me "the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process." (PP's verbatim words).

LinkedIn does not possess Magic acquisition powers to Magically get verified applicant data from every company for every job opening. And, I guess, spoiler alert, LinkedIn also doesn't have Magic Powers to get that info about private school applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Admissions decisions at these schools is much more subjective than many know. The school is attempting to put together a class that satisfies the disparate needs of the interests on campus.

Publishing the data will only make their jobs harder and take the Admissions process in a direction they are not interested in taking.

Yeah, but we deserve to know. Just like how, when you apply to a job, the company sends you the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process, getting to the interview stage, etc. I don't know why private schools get away with being so opaque when everyone else has to be so open.

Um, this is not universal. Do they compile this info (half-assedly) in case they get sued? Sure. That's different that displaying a spreadsheet to the world alongside every job opening

There is something magic called LinkedIn. Check it out, maybe you will learn something about the profile of the people selected for a specific position. Of course, this is more prevalent in white collar jobs.

Are you a bot? LinkedIn doesn't provide me "the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process." (PP's verbatim words).

LinkedIn does not possess Magic acquisition powers to Magically get verified applicant data from every company for every job opening. And, I guess, spoiler alert, LinkedIn also doesn't have Magic Powers to get that info about private school applications.

If there is a position filled, most likely you can see who was hired for that position , and you can have pretty much a good idea why you were not selected. In any case that’s way more transparent than private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Admissions decisions at these schools is much more subjective than many know. The school is attempting to put together a class that satisfies the disparate needs of the interests on campus.

Publishing the data will only make their jobs harder and take the Admissions process in a direction they are not interested in taking.

Yeah, but we deserve to know. Just like how, when you apply to a job, the company sends you the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process, getting to the interview stage, etc. I don't know why private schools get away with being so opaque when everyone else has to be so open.

Um, this is not universal. Do they compile this info (half-assedly) in case they get sued? Sure. That's different that displaying a spreadsheet to the world alongside every job opening

There is something magic called LinkedIn. Check it out, maybe you will learn something about the profile of the people selected for a specific position. Of course, this is more prevalent in white collar jobs.

Are you a bot? LinkedIn doesn't provide me "the statistics about how many applicants to your position there were, what the race and age of the applicants were, what qualifications were best suited to moving forward in the hiring process." (PP's verbatim words).

LinkedIn does not possess Magic acquisition powers to Magically get verified applicant data from every company for every job opening. And, I guess, spoiler alert, LinkedIn also doesn't have Magic Powers to get that info about private school applications.

This person doesn’t know how to use LinkedIn.

[Anonymous]

This whole thread is pointless. The schools aren’t interested in giving out more information to allow the parents of applicants to more easily assess the chances of admission.

That might impact the number of applications they get which they care about.

But beyond that, there’s a lot of subjectivity in the selection process and they wouldn’t know how to report that. Nor are they interested in exposing the different internal needs they are trying to satisfy as the build a class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is pointless. The schools aren’t interested in giving out more information to allow the parents of applicants to more easily assess the chances of admission.

That might impact the number of applications they get which they care about.

But beyond that, there’s a lot of subjectivity in the selection process and they wouldn’t know how to report that. Nor are they interested in exposing the different internal needs they are trying to satisfy as the build a class.

Of course they are not interested. Too much trouble to disclose arbitrary decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know several families who feel burned out by the admissions process and by being rejected multiple times by elite schools without really understanding the difference between their children and the admitted applicants. Is the system truly working, or is there room to improve transparency? Even if the process is highly competitive, I would feel much better if there were hard data to back up the rejection decisions. Do you have the same impression?

If those families wanted "hard data" on rejection decisions, they ought to move to a country where admissions is based strictly on a single admissions test, and then they will have hard data to back up the rejection decisions. That's not how it works at DMV private schools, or most competitive colleges and universities, but you know that already. You just would like to find something to support your bias that certain groups of applicants are not worthy admits and are taking spots from your, whoops, I mean those families' kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several families who feel burned out by the admissions process and by being rejected multiple times by elite schools without really understanding the difference between their children and the admitted applicants. Is the system truly working, or is there room to improve transparency? Even if the process is highly competitive, I would feel much better if there were hard data to back up the rejection decisions. Do you have the same impression?

If those families wanted "hard data" on rejection decisions, they ought to move to a country where admissions is based strictly on a single admissions test, and then they will have hard data to back up the rejection decisions. That's not how it works at DMV private schools, or most competitive colleges and universities, but you know that already. You just would like to find something to support your bias that certain groups of applicants are not worthy admits and are taking spots from your, whoops, I mean those families' kids.


Exactly. This is is embarrassing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several families who feel burned out by the admissions process and by being rejected multiple times by elite schools without really understanding the difference between their children and the admitted applicants. Is the system truly working, or is there room to improve transparency? Even if the process is highly competitive, I would feel much better if there were hard data to back up the rejection decisions. Do you have the same impression?

If those families wanted "hard data" on rejection decisions, they ought to move to a country where admissions is based strictly on a single admissions test, and then they will have hard data to back up the rejection decisions. That's not how it works at DMV private schools, or most competitive colleges and universities, but you know that already. You just would like to find something to support your bias that certain groups of applicants are not worthy admits and are taking spots from your, whoops, I mean those families' kids.

Well, in colleges it is no longer allowed to select candidates based on race, and the data on admitted applicants is shared with the government. Funny that is different for schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several families who feel burned out by the admissions process and by being rejected multiple times by elite schools without really understanding the difference between their children and the admitted applicants. Is the system truly working, or is there room to improve transparency? Even if the process is highly competitive, I would feel much better if there were hard data to back up the rejection decisions. Do you have the same impression?

If those families wanted "hard data" on rejection decisions, they ought to move to a country where admissions is based strictly on a single admissions test, and then they will have hard data to back up the rejection decisions. That's not how it works at DMV private schools, or most competitive colleges and universities, but you know that already. You just would like to find something to support your bias that certain groups of applicants are not worthy admits and are taking spots from your, whoops, I mean those families' kids.

Well, in colleges it is no longer allowed to select candidates based on race, and the data on admitted applicants is shared with the government. Funny that is different for schools.

Not if you actually understand how these schools work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty well accepted that admissions rate to the most competitive schools are between 5% and 20% depending on the entry year. Maret has in their school profile that theirs is 12% across the school - likely higher in the lower school and lower in the upper school.

It's reasonable to extrapolate that St. Albans, GDS, NCS, Potomac and Sidwell are roughly roughly roughly in the same general ballpark.

Now that you know that, has it changed your strategy on applying?

Unfortunately data such as “roughly roughly in the same ballpark” of what is “widely known” is not helpful and is literally just made up guesses

It's worse than that.

The 5% or 10% or 20% are Averages.

That might be useful if all the applicants were equal. But they are not. Some are advantaged and the rates of admission for these applicants is higher than the average. Which means that the rates of admission for those who are not advantaged is lower than the mean percent.

Examples of advantage include siblings, legacies, faculty kids, athletes, academic stars, graduates of "feeder" schools, full pay, kids of the rich and famous, and URMs. The more of these boxes you DC checks, the higher the probability they will be admitted. Admission of these kids isn't automatic, but as a group their rates of admission are higher than average.

The good news for applicants without even one of these advantages is that the number of applicants is:

1. Reported by the Admissions Office which is incented to make the number as high as possible.
2. The result of an energetic campaign to drive up the number of applications through Open Houses, Admissions presentations at feeder schools, and the efforts of alumni, current parents, coaches, and other boosters of the school.

This effort isn't targeted at highly-qualified applicants. The idea is to get as many applications as possible.

Got it. So you’re looking to rationalize why your normal kid didn’t get in to whatever they were rejected from. It must be that kids like him/her (however and whomever he/she is) didn’t stand a chance because of all of the other preferred kids that got in base on connections, race, athleticism, intellectualism or anything else.

Not PP, but I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school (assuming that admissions were done fairly). Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.

Are you saying full transparency is the only way to show admissions were done fairly? Can you define “fairly”?Do you think you know enough about running a school to know what is good/bad for the school? What is your experience running a school?

This is what I said : “I don’t see how anonymized data points on the features that were determinant for the kids admission would be something bad for the school”

No need for enhanced interrogation techniques.

And you said

“Of course if there is an outright bribe or “donation” for admission I can see why a school might prefer to keep things secret.”

Seems you don’t like discussing what you said.

I am glad that you can read. However, You can work on asking questions related to the post and not random unrelated questions.

You really don’t like it when someone challenges what you post. Esp when you are directly quoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several families who feel burned out by the admissions process and by being rejected multiple times by elite schools without really understanding the difference between their children and the admitted applicants. Is the system truly working, or is there room to improve transparency? Even if the process is highly competitive, I would feel much better if there were hard data to back up the rejection decisions. Do you have the same impression?

If those families wanted "hard data" on rejection decisions, they ought to move to a country where admissions is based strictly on a single admissions test, and then they will have hard data to back up the rejection decisions. That's not how it works at DMV private schools, or most competitive colleges and universities, but you know that already. You just would like to find something to support your bias that certain groups of applicants are not worthy admits and are taking spots from your, whoops, I mean those families' kids.

Well, in colleges it is no longer allowed to select candidates based on race, and the data on admitted applicants is shared with the government. Funny that is different for schools.

Not if you actually understand how these schools work.

Schools can select applicants based on race. That’s why they publish diversity indicators.