GDS and Sidwell comparison?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

If you look at the list of NMSF, more than half of them are form that small group. Less than 15 kids tops half of NMSF list (total 16 this year). It is easy to compare Apple to Apple using PSAT.

Sorry, now you are acknowledging that you're using PSAT scores as the basis for determining who the top academic kids in the school are? You are undermining your own conclusions.

PSAT is a standard test no matter matter which level courses you take. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

If you look at the list of NMSF, more than half of them are form that small group. Less than 15 kids tops half of NMSF list (total 16 this year). It is easy to compare Apple to Apple using PSAT.

I'm a different PP that is on the side that says many of the top STEM kids are the top academic kids also....but as a parent of one of these kids in a different grade, not all kids/families care about NMSF. For example, if a kid prefers ACT and has already gotten a 35/36 before Junior year, they may not want to waste time on PSAT prep and won't qualify for NMSF. So I don't buy this particular argument. (I'd also note ACT success is skewed in benefit of humanities kids).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

So - this makes no sense. If you take two kids where both get great grades in humanities and both get great grades in STEM....but one kid is taking higher level STEM than the other kid. The higher STEM course load kid is achieving at a higher academic level than the lower one. Note - this academic level achievement isn't all that matters in applications (and definitely not in life success), as there are many facets to an applications (and life). And your child (in lower STEM) may wind up in a better place in your view in the long run....but it's just not true that the humanities kid is academically outperforming the top STEM kid in such a scenario. But go ahead and tell yourself that "most of top STEM kids" are not also getting A's in humanities.

I completely agree with you. But some people couldn't understand the simple logic. Maybe His/her child is in lower STEM. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

So - this makes no sense. If you take two kids where both get great grades in humanities and both get great grades in STEM....but one kid is taking higher level STEM than the other kid. The higher STEM course load kid is achieving at a higher academic level than the lower one. Note - this academic level achievement isn't all that matters in applications (and definitely not in life success), as there are many facets to an applications (and life). And your child (in lower STEM) may wind up in a better place in your view in the long run....but it's just not true that the humanities kid is academically outperforming the top STEM kid in such a scenario. But go ahead and tell yourself that "most of top STEM kids" are not also getting A's in humanities.

Thanks for your comments, but I assure you that I don't need you to make me feel better about my kid's future prospects of success, either in college applications or in life. But I do remain confident that you really don't have sufficient information to assert that a small group in a class of 120 comprise "the top academic kids in the school." It doesn't hurt my feelings, it's just incredibly arrogant and uninformed about your child's classmates and their in-class academic accomplishments.

It's also scary that you think it's OK to stalk these kids and their achievements in this way, and that you think you are qualified to make public pronouncements about who the top academic kids are among a group of exceedingly smart teenagers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

If you look at the list of NMSF, more than half of them are form that small group. Less than 15 kids tops half of NMSF list (total 16 this year). It is easy to compare Apple to Apple using PSAT.

I'm a different PP that is on the side that says many of the top STEM kids are the top academic kids also....but as a parent of one of these kids in a different grade, not all kids/families care about NMSF. For example, if a kid prefers ACT and has already gotten a 35/36 before Junior year, they may not want to waste time on PSAT prep and won't qualify for NMSF. So I don't buy this particular argument. (I'd also note ACT success is skewed in benefit of humanities kids).

I know most of the kids don't prepare PSAT.

[Anonymous]

This is a really funny discussion. It’s common knowledge that many of the top STEM kids at Sidwell are TJ rejects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell college admissions a disaster this year in the early round...parents are up in arms. For some reason GDS and St Albans are doing better, not great but OK. It's a strange year but worth noting Sidwell College admissions have been in flux for several years.

Really? I know of at least 30 kids from the grade who got in to their ED's. How is that a disaster?

Most kids who took the most challenge math and science courses didn't get in to their ED/EA.

Why? I don’t get why this group would not do well at ED vs the other kids?

Because as the cream of the school, they are reaching for the stars and applying ED a single school with insanely low admit rates if you aren't legacy, URM, athlete. My guess is they will do fine in RD when they apply to several of such schools....one will bite.

They’re not “the cream of the school.” They’re kids who are very strong in science and math and who enjoy those subjects. There are other kids who are very strong students in other areas.

Well, the kids I know who are in these classes are also excelling in English/Language/History ...so I am talking about the ones who are academically they are the top of the class.

“The kids I know...”

These kids are in high school. If you really know as much as you claim to know about them, you’re a frightening busybody. And even then, there’s still no way you know enough about the entire class to proclaim a small group as “the cream of the school.”

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder to me....

Yeah, I don’t like mothers who arrogantly claim to know everything about a group of 120 kids and ignorantly proclaim some of them as “the best.” I try to be a bit more humble than that and embrace the SPICES. Some chip...

Step back - I'm not saying they are the best of the school - there are clearly many dimensions colleges are looking for and Sidwell does the same in it's admissions. What I'm saying these are the academic high-fliers at the school whose goal will more likely to be to get into one of the Uber competitive schools. There are other Sidwell kids who have this goal too but the % of these top math/top science track kids with this goal is likely higher than the % who have this goal among other kids at Sidwell. I suspect other students at Sidwell (not all) may have a more broad approach to admissions - and while they could also be Ivy material - they are happy to choose an SLAC instead.

Therefore if these top math/science track kids are predominantly applying Restricted Early to one of the HYPSM schools, there's a much higher chance that these kids are shut out in the ED cycle than other kids at Sidwell. That's it. No judging them to be better....but given their choice in courses and getting high grades across all disciplines, they are the top academic kids in the school. But that won't guarantee them Dec admission to HYPSM or other uber competitive programs.

But you keep referring to them as the top academic kids in the school. You have no way to know about that, and I think you're both wrong and exceedingly arrogant to say that.

Are you dense? The top math/science kids know who the top math/science kids are because they've been in small classes with them since 9th grade. Let's say the highest math level is honors algebra 2 in 9th grade. At my kid's school this is a cohort of 10 kids. They will go on to take honors pre-calc together in 10th grade. It's not like there is a stealth 9th grader who is taking honors algebra 2 in his own private section in 9th grade an no-one knows about him.

No. But are you dense? The top math and science kids are not necessarily the top academic kids in the school. You are committing numerous logical fallacies to assert otherwise.

FYI - you are talking to two different posters. I'm "step back" and did not post "are you dense". That was a different person. I don't agree with their tone, but I do think you must not have a child in these classes - it's a small group and they know how well each other is doing. It just isn't the case that these kids don't also excel in humanities. In fact, they excel despite spending tons more time on math work than their classmates could fathom.

I have a Sidwell senior. The part you are leaving out is that, as you acknowledge, it is a small group in those classes. The problem with your assertions is that you don't know anything about how well the other 100-110 kids in the class do in humanities classes, who also take the math/science classes a level below. Certainly you don't know about all of them. So you can't know that your small group comprise the top academic kids in the school, you're just applying a STEM bias to your thinking.

If you look at the list of NMSF, more than half of them are form that small group. Less than 15 kids tops half of NMSF list (total 16 this year). It is easy to compare Apple to Apple using PSAT.

Sorry, now you are acknowledging that you're using PSAT scores as the basis for determining who the top academic kids in the school are? You are undermining your own conclusions.

DP here but in fairness to the PPP, among that NMSF list includes a kid who got a 1590 SAT. I have no idea and I’m not going to pretend to know if they were successful in ED. However, the idea that success in ED is meaningful for that kid is ridiculous. That kid will end up at an Ivy or equivalent regardless.

[Anonymous]

PSAT also has nothing to do with whether someone is a "top academic kid" based on their performance in high school, which is what I thought this discussion was about. I know brilliant kids who score off the charts on the PSAT but don't do well in school for one reason or another. PSAT also doesn't measure writing ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think that the way in which the word "rank" is being used may be inconsistent. The article uses the word "rank" but it could be interpreted to be using that word in the context of asserting that Sidwell "ranks" applicants as "excellent" "very good" "good" etc., and not in the context of providing a strict numerical ranking.

And then, perhaps when PP asked the school, the question was "do you rank students when presenting them to colleges" and the answer from Sidwell was "no" because the school does not rank the students numerically. If PP in fact asked Sidwell "do you qualitatively rate students against their peers as 'excellent' etc, as the Secondary School Report requests?" and they said they did not, that would be interesting.

This.

The school does not say, "here is a list of the 14 kids applying to your school: Bobby, Jane, Mikey, Robert, Ralph, Mary, Beth, etc."
What they do, and they have been upfront about it, is provide a school profile, that includes a section about the entire curriculum and where this particularly applicant falls in that curriculum, Most rigorous, rigorous, Less Rigorous...giving the colleges an opportunity to assess the whole student and their academic achievement in context.

Pretty much ALL independent schools do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a really funny discussion. It’s common knowledge that many of the top STEM kids at Sidwell are TJ rejects.

Are you an adult thinking it’s clever to ridicule kids?

[Anonymous]

You can look up Sidwell and GDS at Polarislist.com which ranks high schools by how many kids they sent to Harvard, Princeton and MIT in 2018-2020.

Sidwell sent 9, ranked 148
GDS sent 16, ranked 66

Notably MIT which doesn’t give legacy preference accepted 1 kid and that was from Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a really funny discussion. It’s common knowledge that many of the top STEM kids at Sidwell are TJ rejects.

LOL, do any of these kids even live in Virginia? I doubt it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can look up Sidwell and GDS at Polarislist.com which ranks high schools by how many kids they sent to Harvard, Princeton and MIT in 2018-2020.

Sidwell sent 9, ranked 148
GDS sent 16, ranked 66

Notably MIT which doesn’t give legacy preference accepted 1 kid and that was from Sidwell.

This is actual matriculation not acceptance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can look up Sidwell and GDS at Polarislist.com which ranks high schools by how many kids they sent to Harvard, Princeton and MIT in 2018-2020.

Sidwell sent 9, ranked 148
GDS sent 16, ranked 66

Notably MIT which doesn’t give legacy preference accepted 1 kid and that was from Sidwell.

Sidwell kids generally don't apply to either Princeton or MIT, so if that is what the ranking is based on, then it is pretty self-selective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really funny discussion. It’s common knowledge that many of the top STEM kids at Sidwell are TJ rejects.

LOL, do any of these kids even live in Virginia? I doubt it.

LOL