The Death of Private School As We Know It

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

As long as they can convince the wealthy to send their kids and to recruit their graduates, they will be fine. There is absolutely no indication that either is changing.

Isn't this entire thread evidence that these putative elite colleges are nowhere near their death, since admission to them seems to be the most desirable outcome of K-12 education, public or private??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

[Anonymous]

the death of private schools?? The exact opposite is happening.

[Anonymous]

Are private school families this obnoxious throughout the country or is it just the coastal liberal morons?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

The "rich kid school" stereotype is from much earlier - up to the early 1960s. The 1970s-circa 2005 was the great age of meritocracy, at least the schools were at their most meritocratic. There was always elements of social engineering, but it was much smaller and less pervasive. The great bulk of students were effectively unconnected. But the "hooked" students have come to dominate so much that it's even now substantially crowding out the bright and unhooked, of which the Asian-Americans are penalized the most. The elite schools blatantly discriminate against Asian American students and even rig the admissions processes to justify the discrimination, which means it's decidedly no longer based on any real sense of merit or even a belief in a meritocracy. If the schools are no longer about merit, then I'm not sure what they are about any more. You're not necessarily going there to learn from the best and brightest any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Sidwell does too. It’s really interesting the disconnect between perceptions and reality.

Immediate pp here. Thanks for adding. I wondered about Sidwell but don’t have as much insight or a kid there. Not surprised to hear there are lots of Asian kids there too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

The PP's argument does not sound racist to me. It sounds honest and thought provoking. This is yet another reason why elite colleges may be on the decline, because meaningless racism banter pushes out intelligent discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

The PP's argument does not sound racist to me. It sounds honest and thought provoking. This is yet another reason why elite colleges may be on the decline, because meaningless racism banter pushes out intelligent discussion.

URMs and Asian tennis players being the problem and their attendance devaluing an Ivy League degree isn't a race based argument?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

The PP's argument does not sound racist to me. It sounds honest and thought provoking. This is yet another reason why elite colleges may be on the decline, because meaningless racism banter pushes out intelligent discussion.

URMs and Asian tennis players being the problem and their attendance devaluing an Ivy League degree isn't a race based argument?

The point is that the absence of the children of the rich and powerful devalues Ivy League degrees, not that the presence of URMs and Asian tennis players makes the value go down.

Both groups benefit or benefited from hooks. That has been one of the arguments for affirmative action in enrollments, that hooks were always there but they are being transferred from legacies to URMs and to some non-UMC students.

Also, think about the most meritocratic big name schools like CalTech and MIT. How many DC private school parents are pining for their children to go to school with bunch of non-rich nerds? Where are the boasting and social climbing opportunities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Potomac parent here. Your statement is inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Potomac parent here. Your statement is inaccurate.

I am a Potomac parent. The US has lots of Asian kids.