Sidwell Basketball Article

[Anonymous]

How is so hard for people to understand the point that was originally trying to be made?

Someone said that Sidwell would be the plurality #1 choice. No one said it was everyone's top choice. No one said that more applicants = unanimous #1 choice. No one said that there were no students accepted from Sidwell that turned it down for other schools.

From the admissions rate, yield, NMS, and applicant numbers posted in here, in combination with subjective factors such as cache and popularity on this forum, I think it's totally reasonable to accept the hypothesis that Sidwell would be a plurality preference.

Not a majority preference, and maybe not a plurality preference by a great margin, but a plurality preference nonetheless. You don't necessarily have to agree with that hypothesis, but the idea that Gonzaga would even be in the conversation simply because they have a bigger class is absurd.

[Anonymous]

You're welcome to believe anything you want! The thing is, us researchers have a hard time believing statements like "Sidwell is the plurality preference" without actual data. If you said instead, "Sidwell is my number 1 school," then researchers would have no problem with the statement.

You mention NMS, but part of the problem is that Sidwell doesn't issue average SATs. Also, as someone pointed out, Sidwell's NMSSFs are unusually high for the school this year, so we can't draw conclusions from just this year. And cachet is very subjective, and I'm sure some would think Gonzaga's catholic affiliation has more cachet for them.

Also, you are misstating the point about Gonzaga. Nobody said it's popular because of large class sizes. They said it's "in the conversation" because 1,000 families think highly enough of Gonzaga to apply there. Some of us can't see why you think these 1000 applications are totally meaningless!

So yes, Gonzaga does deserve to be "in the conversation." Geez!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:... The thing is, us researchers have a hard time believing statements like "Sidwell is the plurality preference" without actual data ....

Perhaps some of you researchers should propose some actual data that might answer the question. The only data point I've seen from any of you is that Gonzaga gets 1000 applications, which (I hope you agree) is an incredibly flimsy rationale. (BTW, where does that 1000 applications number come from anyway? Source?)

I completely agree with the point some people have made that the best school for any individual child is a personal choice, and cannot be determined by any amount of numbers and data about what the plurality might prefer. I also am not touting Sidwell, or any other school for that matter.

I'm just surprised that all you economists, numbers people, and self-professed math geeks are spending all your effort criticizing other approaches, and not offering any of your own. Consider this a friendly and respectful challenge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is so hard for people to understand the point that was originally trying to be made?

Someone said that Sidwell would be the plurality #1 choice. No one said it was everyone's top choice. No one said that more applicants = unanimous #1 choice. No one said that there were no students accepted from Sidwell that turned it down for other schools.

From the admissions rate, yield, NMS, and applicant numbers posted in here, in combination with subjective factors such as cache and popularity on this forum, I think it's totally reasonable to accept the hypothesis that Sidwell would be a plurality preference.

Not a majority preference, and maybe not a plurality preference by a great margin, but a plurality preference nonetheless. You don't necessarily have to agree with that hypothesis, but the idea that Gonzaga would even be in the conversation simply because they have a bigger class is absurd.

Makes sense to me.

Not a Sidwell or Gonzaga parent, and have no aspiration to be. But certainly seems reasonable to suggest that, if prospective parents were given the chance to apply to five private schools in the area, and believed their DC had a fighting chance of getting in to all the schools, that Sidwell would be on more lists than any other school.

It is undeniably the all purpose, high-achieving, hard-charging, co-ed, almost-nondenominational school of choice in this area -- whatever its limitations might be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:... The thing is, us researchers have a hard time believing statements like "Sidwell is the plurality preference" without actual data ....

Perhaps some of you researchers should propose some actual data that might answer the question. The only data point I've seen from any of you is that Gonzaga gets 1000 applications, which (I hope you agree) is an incredibly flimsy rationale. (BTW, where does that 1000 applications number come from anyway? Source?)

I completely agree with the point some people have made that the best school for any individual child is a personal choice, and cannot be determined by any amount of numbers and data about what the plurality might prefer. I also am not touting Sidwell, or any other school for that matter.

I'm just surprised that all you economists, numbers people, and self-professed math geeks are spending all your effort criticizing other approaches, and not offering any of your own. Consider this a friendly and respectful challenge.

I don't agree at all that 1000 is "flimsy"! If you knew anything about numbers, you'd understand that it's actually quite meaningful, because it measures an interest in the school.

Moreover, your challenge has already been answered: several self-identified economists and researchers have actually said that 1000 applications figure is useful, again, because it measures a commitment to the school. Your attempt to write it off as "flimsy" looks like you're just making stuff up as you go along.

I agree with the poster who said that the Sidwell boosters need to get a life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Makes sense to me.

Not a Sidwell or Gonzaga parent, and have no aspiration to be. But certainly seems reasonable to suggest that, if prospective parents were given the chance to apply to five private schools in the area, and believed their DC had a fighting chance of getting in to all the schools, that Sidwell would be on more lists than any other school.

It is undeniably the all purpose, high-achieving, hard-charging, co-ed, almost-nondenominational school of choice in this area -- whatever its limitations might be.

Statistics? Numbers? Any answer to the question about why those 1000 Gonzaga applicants aren't applying also to Sidwell? (At least, any answer that doesn't involve pure speculation about what people would do "if" money was no problem, and "if" they had a fighting change to get in. Speculation like this is useless.)

[Anonymous]

The burden of proof of a hypothesis is the responsibility of the person making that hypothesis. The hypothesis being that "Sidwell is the plurality preference". The burden is not on everybody else to prove the hypothesis is wrong. You have not proven your hypothesis.

Your methodology for proving your hypothesis has been shown to be a bad methodology by the Wharton paper that somebody used to prove your hypothesis. Which a prosecuting attorney would call a slam dunk.

Check.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:... The thing is, us researchers have a hard time believing statements like "Sidwell is the plurality preference" without actual data ....

Perhaps some of you researchers should propose some actual data that might answer the question. The only data point I've seen from any of you is that Gonzaga gets 1000 applications, which (I hope you agree) is an incredibly flimsy rationale. (BTW, where does that 1000 applications number come from anyway? Source?)

I completely agree with the point some people have made that the best school for any individual child is a personal choice, and cannot be determined by any amount of numbers and data about what the plurality might prefer. I also am not touting Sidwell, or any other school for that matter.

I'm just surprised that all you economists, numbers people, and self-professed math geeks are spending all your effort criticizing other approaches, and not offering any of your own. Consider this a friendly and respectful challenge.

[Anonymous]

Please prove your hypothesis that Gonzaga is the most preferred school in the DC area. And don't give me the "1000 applications" garbage because it is weak and has been debunked repeatedly on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Makes sense to me.

Not a Sidwell or Gonzaga parent, and have no aspiration to be. But certainly seems reasonable to suggest that, if prospective parents were given the chance to apply to five private schools in the area, and believed their DC had a fighting chance of getting in to all the schools, that Sidwell would be on more lists than any other school.

It is undeniably the all purpose, high-achieving, hard-charging, co-ed, almost-nondenominational school of choice in this area -- whatever its limitations might be.

For this to be true, it would have to be true that Gonzaga has nothing to attract parents except (a) its affordability and (b) the relatively easier (1 in 4, or 250/1000) acceptance ratios. However, we know that lots of families prefer Gonzaga for reasons like (c) getting a Catholic education, or (d) the great sports teams, or (e) location for parents who can't commute to upper NW.

Your whole theory is based on the unproven idea that parents would happily chuck Gonzaga's Catholic education or great sports teams for the chance to attend Sidwell. I can't agree with this. At the very least, you haven't proven it, and I doubt you can.

I don't have a connection with Sidwell or Gonzaga either. But I have done a lot of statistical theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please prove your hypothesis that Gonzaga is the most preferred school in the DC area. And don't give me the "1000 applications" garbage because it is weak and has been debunked repeatedly on this thread.

NO. You and 1-2 others have tried to debunk it, but you have failed. Several people besides myself have pointed out why you have failed. Please go back and reread these posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You're welcome to believe anything you want! The thing is, us researchers have a hard time believing statements like "Sidwell is the plurality preference" without actual data. If you said instead, "Sidwell is my number 1 school," then researchers would have no problem with the statement.

You mention NMS, but part of the problem is that Sidwell doesn't issue average SATs. Also, as someone pointed out, Sidwell's NMSSFs are unusually high for the school this year, so we can't draw conclusions from just this year. And cachet is very subjective, and I'm sure some would think Gonzaga's catholic affiliation has more cachet for them.

Also, you are misstating the point about Gonzaga. Nobody said it's popular because of large class sizes. They said it's "in the conversation" because 1,000 families think highly enough of Gonzaga to apply there. Some of us can't see why you think these 1000 applications are totally meaningless!

So yes, Gonzaga does deserve to be "in the conversation." Geez!

SAT's are unrelated to NMS. And I don't believe that the NMS numbers are unusually high for the school. I can only think of one or two years in the past decade where Sidwell didn't have the highest number of NMS for area private schools. And there's not one year where Gonzaga had more than Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

SAT's are unrelated to NMS. And I don't believe that the NMS numbers are unusually high for the school. I can only think of one or two years in the past decade where Sidwell didn't have the highest number of NMS for area private schools. And there's not one year where Gonzaga had more than Sidwell.

Wait, what? The NMSSF (I was one) is based on the PSAT, which is a close relative of the SAT. So SATs and NMSSFs are indeed related. Sidwell's NMS data would be interesting to have because it would show the *average* SAT score in the class, while the NMSSF shows *the top end* of the score distribution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

SAT's are unrelated to NMS. And I don't believe that the NMS numbers are unusually high for the school. I can only think of one or two years in the past decade where Sidwell didn't have the highest number of NMS for area private schools. And there's not one year where Gonzaga had more than Sidwell.

What is your connection to Sidwell, exactly? Or can you point the rest of us to a table showing this?

[Anonymous]

If you look back at the chart that someone compiled of multiple years of NMSFs (it's linked in the first couple of FAQ posts), Sidwell had the highest percentage of NMSFs (about 15%) over about a 5 year period, followed by St. Albans (at 14.3%), followed by NCS (11%). As I recall, that chart was created in 2009 or so. It is true that Sidwell's percentage is not the highest every year -- I think St. Albans' % was higher last year and maybe in another recent year, and a couple of years ago GDS had a whole slew of NMSFs. On that chart, Gonzaga has 2 % NMSFs over the same time period. This year I believe they had 6 total, and assuming a graduating class of about 200, that would be 3%.

My kids don't go to Sidwell, but I don't have trouble agreeing that for academics, Sidwell is generally, if not invariably, top of the heap in terms of selectivity in admissions and strength of the cohort. Standardized tests aren't everything, but they are standardized, and they work for me as a decent proxy for academic aptitude -- every NMSF I met was a gifted student.

This feels very recent vintage American society to me -- nobody can stand to admit that their kid isn't the smartest, or doesn't go to the best academic school, etc. (at least until college when everyone goes bonkers over a short list of ten schools). My kid is pretty smart. My kid likes school. My kid isn't the smartest, isn't the most athletic, doesn't deserve more playing time on the team, doesn't deserve a higher GPA, hasn't gotten screwed by the teachers, and guess what, my kid is fine by me and I think will achieve good academic and career success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you look back at the chart that someone compiled of multiple years of NMSFs (it's linked in the first couple of FAQ posts), Sidwell had the highest percentage of NMSFs (about 15%) over about a 5 year period, followed by St. Albans (at 14.3%), followed by NCS (11%). As I recall, that chart was created in 2009 or so. It is true that Sidwell's percentage is not the highest every year -- I think St. Albans' % was higher last year and maybe in another recent year, and a couple of years ago GDS had a whole slew of NMSFs. On that chart, Gonzaga has 2 % NMSFs over the same time period. This year I believe they had 6 total, and assuming a graduating class of about 200, that would be 3%.

My kids don't go to Sidwell, but I don't have trouble agreeing that for academics, Sidwell is generally, if not invariably, top of the heap in terms of selectivity in admissions and strength of the cohort. Standardized tests aren't everything, but they are standardized, and they work for me as a decent proxy for academic aptitude -- every NMSF I met was a gifted student.

This feels very recent vintage American society to me -- nobody can stand to admit that their kid isn't the smartest, or doesn't go to the best academic school, etc. (at least until college when everyone goes bonkers over a short list of ten schools). My kid is pretty smart. My kid likes school. My kid isn't the smartest, isn't the most athletic, doesn't deserve more playing time on the team, doesn't deserve a higher GPA, hasn't gotten screwed by the teachers, and guess what, my kid is fine by me and I think will achieve good academic and career success.

OK, but then by this measure, Thomas Jefferson is the most desired school in the area.

Take your point about vintage American society and competitiveness to the Sidwell boosters who are pushing a weird (because it's dependent on class size but not any other qualities a school might have) ratio as the best measure of a school's worth.