St. Albans acceptance rate = 25 to 30%?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is definitely a "look". I don't think my husband and I share it but my son has it.
Most parents do although less in the upper school. By then everyone is either haggard or has the alien/plastic surgery look.

My kid is clean cut and denied. He’s already at a boys school. I don’t know what else they want but it must be necessary to have a connection or be a minority.

I posted earlier that they wanted a certain " look". That does not mean "clean cut". It means an air of unstriving affluence. So it does have to do with the parents + students. It is like summing up horses for a race. Your breeding is being summed up.

There is some truth to this; there is a certain "look" that speaks of affluence and it's found in spades at STA. You could put these kids in Walmart clothing and they'd still have it.
Also, regardless of looks there is a large number of boys who have charisma/leadership traits. I definitely think STA admissions prioritizes leaders over scholars or even athletes. They want the total package but they are generally looking for more than book-smarts.
They want the "it factor". They know that these kids will do very well post-graduation, whether they go to Yale or SMU.

My son is at STA and I wouldn't say he has any of these qualities. He fits in fine but he's a bit of an anomaly.

This made me gag.

and yet here you are, posting about STA in the middle of a work day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best advice is don’t waste you time and money with applying unless you have a strong connection. And save your child from the rejection when there never is a chance without that connection.

+1

What type of connection do you need? And are there any schools you can get into without those type of connections mentioned on this board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has a point.

Most boys admitted to STA are hooked. Unhooked boys have to be better to overcome the hooks most other boys have. That’s the way it works and everyone, including you, knows it.

So some of the boys in your “everyone” got in on merit but most did not. How that worked for the PP’s son? I don’t know.

I make no apologies for that PP but you and by extension STA aren’t coming off very well in this little spat.

Who says I have kids that go to STA? I’ve never commented on what does or doesn’t happen at STA. It was a comment on her assumption that because her kid didn’t get in that decisions couldn’t have been based on merit. And my point was simply that she’s going to be whining in 6 years when she discovers college admissions works the same way.

If you don’t have a kid who attends makes your hot-headed comments even more bizarre. To be that unhinged and that invested when you don’t know or have a relationship with the school. You have no credibility and it doesn’t concern you.

well, I suppose PP doesn't have a relationship with the school now, either, does she? So she has no credibility either.

and I didn't say whether I did or did not have kids that go to STA. Whether I do or not isn't relevant to the point I was making.

PP did attempt to get in the school so they know that process. You are reactive and your posts are dramatic and low level with your snarky insults. On top of that, you reduced merit to a joke.
You could never get in that school with your behavior and you admitted that you do not have children who attend in is not in line with your bizarre reactions.

PP only knows the result of the process - a rejection. That doesn't mean she knows the process or the decision-making criteria. And she's the one, who in a fit of entitled pique, proclaimed that if her kid didn't get in, it couldn't possibly be based on merit.

I am being reactive, though, so you've got me there. I'll accept snarky, too, because that and derision is all the PP deserves at this point. Accept that your kid didn't get in, don't try to explain why and certainly don't have your explanation belittle the kids who did get in.

if you're a parent at STA, you do realize, I hope, that when PP says admissions isn't based on merit (thereby implying admits don't have it), she's talking about YOUR kid.

Plenty of Albans parents readily admitted on this thread that the school doesn’t fully base decisions on merit. They’ve included other reasons such as a “look.”
You yourself dismissed merit anyway and then rage about one saying it’s not solely based on that. You are also not at the school.

I'm not the one who dismissed merit. PP did. PP was the one who said that merit played no factor in STA admissions because her kid didn't get in. I've not made any statement about what STA uses for criteria.

I've been deliberately opaque about whether I have kids at the school because whether I do or not has no bearing on my thoughts about PP's whinging about her kid's rejection. If we all limited ourselves to commenting only on threads where we had kids (and who knows, maybe I am), this forum would have 1/10 the number of posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has a point.

Most boys admitted to STA are hooked. Unhooked boys have to be better to overcome the hooks most other boys have. That’s the way it works and everyone, including you, knows it.

So some of the boys in your “everyone” got in on merit but most did not. How that worked for the PP’s son? I don’t know.

I make no apologies for that PP but you and by extension STA aren’t coming off very well in this little spat.

Who says I have kids that go to STA? I’ve never commented on what does or doesn’t happen at STA. It was a comment on her assumption that because her kid didn’t get in that decisions couldn’t have been based on merit. And my point was simply that she’s going to be whining in 6 years when she discovers college admissions works the same way.

If you don’t have a kid who attends makes your hot-headed comments even more bizarre. To be that unhinged and that invested when you don’t know or have a relationship with the school. You have no credibility and it doesn’t concern you.

well, I suppose PP doesn't have a relationship with the school now, either, does she? So she has no credibility either.

and I didn't say whether I did or did not have kids that go to STA. Whether I do or not isn't relevant to the point I was making.

PP did attempt to get in the school so they know that process. You are reactive and your posts are dramatic and low level with your snarky insults. On top of that, you reduced merit to a joke.
You could never get in that school with your behavior and you admitted that you do not have children who attend in is not in line with your bizarre reactions.

PP only knows the result of the process - a rejection. That doesn't mean she knows the process or the decision-making criteria. And she's the one, who in a fit of entitled pique, proclaimed that if her kid didn't get in, it couldn't possibly be based on merit.

I am being reactive, though, so you've got me there. I'll accept snarky, too, because that and derision is all the PP deserves at this point. Accept that your kid didn't get in, don't try to explain why and certainly don't have your explanation belittle the kids who did get in.

if you're a parent at STA, you do realize, I hope, that when PP says admissions isn't based on merit (thereby implying admits don't have it), she's talking about YOUR kid.

Plenty of Albans parents readily admitted on this thread that the school doesn’t fully base decisions on merit. They’ve included other reasons such as a “look.”
You yourself dismissed merit anyway and then rage about one saying it’s not solely based on that. You are also not at the school.

I'm not the one who dismissed merit. PP did. PP was the one who said that merit played no factor in STA admissions because her kid didn't get in. I've not made any statement about what STA uses for criteria.

I've been deliberately opaque about whether I have kids at the school because whether I do or not has no bearing on my thoughts about PP's whinging about her kid's rejection. If we all limited ourselves to commenting only on threads where we had kids (and who knows, maybe I am), this forum would have 1/10 the number of posts.

Are you still going on about this? You are the one doing the whining. You are obsessed and it’s even more bizarre that it has no concern with you. Hell bent on pricing some point that you don’t have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is definitely a "look". I don't think my husband and I share it but my son has it.
Most parents do although less in the upper school. By then everyone is either haggard or has the alien/plastic surgery look.

My kid is clean cut and denied. He’s already at a boys school. I don’t know what else they want but it must be necessary to have a connection or be a minority.

I posted earlier that they wanted a certain " look". That does not mean "clean cut". It means an air of unstriving affluence. So it does have to do with the parents + students. It is like summing up horses for a race. Your breeding is being summed up.

There is some truth to this; there is a certain "look" that speaks of affluence and it's found in spades at STA. You could put these kids in Walmart clothing and they'd still have it.
Also, regardless of looks there is a large number of boys who have charisma/leadership traits. I definitely think STA admissions prioritizes leaders over scholars or even athletes. They want the total package but they are generally looking for more than book-smarts.
They want the "it factor". They know that these kids will do very well post-graduation, whether they go to Yale or SMU.

My son is at STA and I wouldn't say he has any of these qualities. He fits in fine but he's a bit of an anomaly.

This made me gag.

and yet here you are, posting about STA in the middle of a work day.

Much like yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has a point.

Most boys admitted to STA are hooked. Unhooked boys have to be better to overcome the hooks most other boys have. That’s the way it works and everyone, including you, knows it.

So some of the boys in your “everyone” got in on merit but most did not. How that worked for the PP’s son? I don’t know.

I make no apologies for that PP but you and by extension STA aren’t coming off very well in this little spat.

Who says I have kids that go to STA? I’ve never commented on what does or doesn’t happen at STA. It was a comment on her assumption that because her kid didn’t get in that decisions couldn’t have been based on merit. And my point was simply that she’s going to be whining in 6 years when she discovers college admissions works the same way.

If you don’t have a kid who attends makes your hot-headed comments even more bizarre. To be that unhinged and that invested when you don’t know or have a relationship with the school. You have no credibility and it doesn’t concern you.

well, I suppose PP doesn't have a relationship with the school now, either, does she? So she has no credibility either.

and I didn't say whether I did or did not have kids that go to STA. Whether I do or not isn't relevant to the point I was making.

PP did attempt to get in the school so they know that process. You are reactive and your posts are dramatic and low level with your snarky insults. On top of that, you reduced merit to a joke.
You could never get in that school with your behavior and you admitted that you do not have children who attend in is not in line with your bizarre reactions.

PP only knows the result of the process - a rejection. That doesn't mean she knows the process or the decision-making criteria. And she's the one, who in a fit of entitled pique, proclaimed that if her kid didn't get in, it couldn't possibly be based on merit.

I am being reactive, though, so you've got me there. I'll accept snarky, too, because that and derision is all the PP deserves at this point. Accept that your kid didn't get in, don't try to explain why and certainly don't have your explanation belittle the kids who did get in.

if you're a parent at STA, you do realize, I hope, that when PP says admissions isn't based on merit (thereby implying admits don't have it), she's talking about YOUR kid.

Plenty of Albans parents readily admitted on this thread that the school doesn’t fully base decisions on merit. They’ve included other reasons such as a “look.”
You yourself dismissed merit anyway and then rage about one saying it’s not solely based on that. You are also not at the school.

I'm not the one who dismissed merit. PP did. PP was the one who said that merit played no factor in STA admissions because her kid didn't get in. I've not made any statement about what STA uses for criteria.

I've been deliberately opaque about whether I have kids at the school because whether I do or not has no bearing on my thoughts about PP's whinging about her kid's rejection. If we all limited ourselves to commenting only on threads where we had kids (and who knows, maybe I am), this forum would have 1/10 the number of posts.

You never answers the question posted upthread. Do you always inject yourself?

[Anonymous]

My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Then I know what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think St Albans prioritizes boys from private elementary schools - I think STA is looking for boys who will stay through graduation and families who are committed to private school early demonstrate they value paying all that money for the private school experience. Further, STA knows the curriculum, teachers and culture of these places. Wouldn’t you listen to the opinion of someone you know first-hand than someone you don’t know? Same with coming from Beauvoir. They really know those kids because they came from the Close.

But don’t take that to mean that these boys are not deserving. They often are great students who achieve a lot of success at STA. Another poster mentioned that they like certain public schools more than others and this is in the same vein. They have seen students succeed and add to the community from these schools so they too seem like a known quantities.

Bottom line, there are many more qualified boys than slots. There are deserving boys who are not offered admission, certainly. I am glad there are so many private schools in the area and hopefully one of those other phenomenal choices worked out for your kid.

We of course they prioritize boys from private schools, esp BVR. That’s called a hook. Schools those kids fit the mold because the ones who don’t have already been counseled out (lovely phrase) and the parents have money and one or two of the other hooks. That’s what they build a class on. That’s the business model.

Get you kid into a k-8 early when merit does not count and they’ll get that private school bump. A k-12 (and BVR+NCS/STA counts) is even better; they can coast through US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Please, I’ve seen well qualified students get passed up for students who will check a box. “Whole package” is not why you’ve got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Please, I’ve seen well qualified students get passed up for students who will check a box. “Whole package” is not why you’ve got.

Please what? Not sure what you're trying to say. I had assumed my kid checked all of the oft-stated boxes – and he was WL. So I was obviously wrong. We clearly do NOT have "the whole package."

[Anonymous]

We were not connected (at all) but applied multiple years and admitted in 9th. I know quite a few kids who were admitted in the second or even third try--even siblings.
If you don't have a hook, this is one you can create: sustained interest.
STA is a very hard admit and often a multi-year endeavor. The tours, etc make it seem like you can just get a kid in but but most people do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Please, I’ve seen well qualified students get passed up for students who will check a box. “Whole package” is not why you’ve got.

Please what? Not sure what you're trying to say. I had assumed my kid checked all of the oft-stated boxes – and he was WL. So I was obviously wrong. We clearly do NOT have "the whole package."

You're not necessarily wrong - your DC could have checked all the boxes and still be WL because at a school like STA there are more boys who check all the oft-stated boxes than there are spots. At that point, it's a crapshoot. Maybe your kid loves to play chess and do robotics but there are 5 others in the class who do that and they need an artsy kid. Maybe your kid is great at baseball and soccer but they need more chess kids in the class. Maybe you live in DC and they need a kid from MD or VA to round things out. You'll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out why your DC was not admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Please, I’ve seen well qualified students get passed up for students who will check a box. “Whole package” is not why you’ve got.

Please what? Not sure what you're trying to say. I had assumed my kid checked all of the oft-stated boxes – and he was WL. So I was obviously wrong. We clearly do NOT have "the whole package."

You're not necessarily wrong - your DC could have checked all the boxes and still be WL because at a school like STA there are more boys who check all the oft-stated boxes than there are spots. At that point, it's a crapshoot. Maybe your kid loves to play chess and do robotics but there are 5 others in the class who do that and they need an artsy kid. Maybe your kid is great at baseball and soccer but they need more chess kids in the class. Maybe you live in DC and they need a kid from MD or VA to round things out. You'll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out why your DC was not admitted.

Cements is even more that it’s a waste of time and effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid was waitlisted. I assume that he checked all of the boxes, but he's coming from public school and we (the parents) are not well connected or high profile. I didn't fully realize just how much the "whole package" likely mattered.

Please, I’ve seen well qualified students get passed up for students who will check a box. “Whole package” is not why you’ve got.

Please what? Not sure what you're trying to say. I had assumed my kid checked all of the oft-stated boxes – and he was WL. So I was obviously wrong. We clearly do NOT have "the whole package."

You're not necessarily wrong - your DC could have checked all the boxes and still be WL because at a school like STA there are more boys who check all the oft-stated boxes than there are spots. At that point, it's a crapshoot. Maybe your kid loves to play chess and do robotics but there are 5 others in the class who do that and they need an artsy kid. Maybe your kid is great at baseball and soccer but they need more chess kids in the class. Maybe you live in DC and they need a kid from MD or VA to round things out. You'll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out why your DC was not admitted.

Cements is even more that it’s a waste of time and effort.

Not for those who are admitted