Big 3 College Placement 2018-19 Cycle

[Anonymous]

What rules?

[Anonymous]

Sidwell parent here. As far as I know, the rule is just about the number of schools you can apply to. Is there something else?

[Anonymous]

(Meaning the number of schools they’ll send stuff to...) I don’t know if they enforce it or if it’s a strong recommendation though.

[Anonymous]

"Friends" -Let's not discuss student/parent emails on a public forum --It will spiral to a bad place...

[Anonymous]

Let’s just say that the rules announced in the email read more as quackery than Quakerly!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. What?

Yup. It leaves one speechless.

Or maybe people should lighten up?

[Anonymous]

Someone share the rules!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a child at Sidwell—not a senior. I have no expectation that a college counselor can “get my kid in.” To me, a good counselor helps a child identify the most appropriate schools for them and helps them craft the most competitive application (in terms of how they position themselves, who they ask for rec’s, etc.) And yes, someone who helps them if they find themselves on a waitlist. I’d hope a public school counselor would help with that scenario too! Patrick Gallagher is the head of college counseling and was beloved at Georgetown Prep. I think Sidwell parents are happy with him too. If there’s someone else who is a dud, then I’m glad they’re not renewing his contract. There are a lot of legacies in my kid’s class but they’re super bright and accomplished. They likely could get in without the hook. Who knows whether they will—or will even want to apply! But of course it will help them if they do. My kid has a lot of senior friends who got into schools early. I heard several mentions of Penn, one of Harvard, two of Dartmouth, etc. I’d imagine that the class did well overall. But yes, Sidwell parents don’t really talk about this stuff with each other, and they generally tell their kids to be low key because others might be disappointed or feel anxious because they won’t know until spring where they’re going. It’s insensitive to focus on these stats with each other now.

Maybe you don't talk about this with other parents, but, believe me, they are.

[Anonymous]

Yes and not in a good way sometimes. They are all for diversity but when their kid does not get into their college of choice, the support for diversity suddenly evaporates and they claim unfair URM advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is in denial. Most of the posters say it helps. It’s a question of whether you can draw any general conclusions about the legacy pool or claim that you must be hooked to be admitted.

Exactly. It's the folks dismissing certain admit as merely "legacies" who are, without any evidence, implying that these students were somehow less qualified or deserving on the merits. When in fact the opposite is generally true.

Schools would be a lot less white if they didn't take legacy status into account. Just look at schools where legacies matter (Harvard) and ones where they don't matter (MIT).

Jesus. These schools already boast that they’re at 50 percent “people of color”? What do you want? Eighty percent?! Let’s get rid of racial preferences and admit based on merit. Period.

If they did that schools would be 80% people of color. They’d all be Asian and white people would still complain and try to find a new way to rig the system. Face it, all white people want is a system where their less qualified kid gets in. You throw around the word merit but that’s not what you want.

I disagree that they would all be Asian. They are building well rounded and diverse classes. Diversity is more than race or religion. They are trying to build a well rounded class full of exceptional students, scholar-athletes, geographical differences, personality differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is in denial. Most of the posters say it helps. It’s a question of whether you can draw any general conclusions about the legacy pool or claim that you must be hooked to be admitted.

Exactly. It's the folks dismissing certain admit as merely "legacies" who are, without any evidence, implying that these students were somehow less qualified or deserving on the merits. When in fact the opposite is generally true.

Schools would be a lot less white if they didn't take legacy status into account. Just look at schools where legacies matter (Harvard) and ones where they don't matter (MIT).

Jesus. These schools already boast that they’re at 50 percent “people of color”? What do you want? Eighty percent?! Let’s get rid of racial preferences and admit based on merit. Period.

If they did that schools would be 80% people of color. They’d all be Asian and white people would still complain and try to find a new way to rig the system. Face it, all white people want is a system where their less qualified kid gets in. You throw around the word merit but that’s not what you want.

I disagree that they would all be Asian. They are building well rounded and diverse classes. Diversity is more than race or religion. They are trying to build a well rounded class full of exceptional students, scholar-athletes, geographical differences, personality differences.

Oh - so not merit after all. You want to scream merit because you think it will mean more white people, but then when it becomes apparent that it doesn't, then we start in with 'personality'. I see - when you say a well rounded and diverse class, you mean Germans and Italians.

You want to see what true merit admissions looks like? Stuyvesant High School in NYC uses a single test to determine admissions. It's 75% Asian/18% white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Patrick is fantastic. Some parents at Big 3 privates are nuts.

There are too many psycho parents out there. These fools are going to drive out the best people working in these schools. So over these self-involved, entitled 1%er people. They need to put their energy into solving some real world problems instead of obsessing over colleges. Anyone who ever for once thought there was any guarantee to an Ivy is an absolute idiot anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrick is fantastic. Some parents at Big 3 privates are nuts.

There are too many psycho parents out there. These fools are going to drive out the best people working in these schools. So over these self-involved, entitled 1%er people. They need to put their energy into solving some real world problems instead of obsessing over colleges. Anyone who ever for once thought there was any guarantee to an Ivy is an absolute idiot anyways.

This seems like a Sidwell specific complaint. Sure there are entitled crazy parents at all schools, but don’t deflect by bringing other schools into this specific argument

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrick is fantastic. Some parents at Big 3 privates are nuts.

There are too many psycho parents out there. These fools are going to drive out the best people working in these schools. So over these self-involved, entitled 1%er people. They need to put their energy into solving some real world problems instead of obsessing over colleges. Anyone who ever for once thought there was any guarantee to an Ivy is an absolute idiot anyways.

This seems like a Sidwell specific complaint. Sure there are entitled crazy parents at all schools, but don’t deflect by bringing other schools into this specific argument

It is not at all Sidwell specific! I have no connection to SFS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone share the rules!

What happens @ the Sidwell college counseling office STAYS at the Sidwell college counseling office.