DC private school consultant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

Yes, but applicant has to be qualified. The consultant will be able to assess which school is a better fit first.

No, the applicant has to be able to afford the consultant. Then the consultant does the assessment and recommends schools. Money first and if you don’t have it, your qualifications won’t matter.

Does it increase the chances of your child getting in? Having a consultant I mean?

As mentioned above, I think the best way to look at it is that a consultant will not help your unqualified kid get into a school that they would not have otherwise. However, a consultant with relationships in admissions can help your otherwise qualified applicant at least be seen versus other qualified kids. Take that for what it’s worth.

So you are saying that, between two equally qualified applicants, the one with money to hire a consultant will be favored by admissions offices. It follows an applicant who cannot hire a consultant has to be better qualified to get the same consideration. I can see why wealthy parents would be fine with this arrangement - rich kids don’t have to be as qualified - but one would think the admissions offices would be more sensitive to the inequity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

Yes, but applicant has to be qualified. The consultant will be able to assess which school is a better fit first.

No, the applicant has to be able to afford the consultant. Then the consultant does the assessment and recommends schools. Money first and if you don’t have it, your qualifications won’t matter.

Does it increase the chances of your child getting in? Having a consultant I mean?

Yes it sounds like that is what she's saying. It also sounds accurate, alas.
As mentioned above, I think the best way to look at it is that a consultant will not help your unqualified kid get into a school that they would not have otherwise. However, a consultant with relationships in admissions can help your otherwise qualified applicant at least be seen versus other qualified kids. Take that for what it’s worth.

So you are saying that, between two equally qualified applicants, the one with money to hire a consultant will be favored by admissions offices. It follows an applicant who cannot hire a consultant has to be better qualified to get the same consideration. I can see why wealthy parents would be fine with this arrangement - rich kids don’t have to be as qualified - but one would think the admissions offices would be more sensitive to the inequity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

Yes, but applicant has to be qualified. The consultant will be able to assess which school is a better fit first.

No, the applicant has to be able to afford the consultant. Then the consultant does the assessment and recommends schools. Money first and if you don’t have it, your qualifications won’t matter.

Does it increase the chances of your child getting in? Having a consultant I mean?

As mentioned above, I think the best way to look at it is that a consultant will not help your unqualified kid get into a school that they would not have otherwise. However, a consultant with relationships in admissions can help your otherwise qualified applicant at least be seen versus other qualified kids. Take that for what it’s worth.

So you are saying that, between two equally qualified applicants, the one with money to hire a consultant will be favored by admissions offices. It follows an applicant who cannot hire a consultant has to be better qualified to get the same consideration. I can see why wealthy parents would be fine with this arrangement - rich kids don’t have to be as qualified - but one would think the admissions offices would be more sensitive to the inequity.

Yes it sounds like that is what she's saying. It also sounds accurate, alas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

Yes, but applicant has to be qualified. The consultant will be able to assess which school is a better fit first.

No, the applicant has to be able to afford the consultant. Then the consultant does the assessment and recommends schools. Money first and if you don’t have it, your qualifications won’t matter.

Does it increase the chances of your child getting in? Having a consultant I mean?

As mentioned above, I think the best way to look at it is that a consultant will not help your unqualified kid get into a school that they would not have otherwise. However, a consultant with relationships in admissions can help your otherwise qualified applicant at least be seen versus other qualified kids. Take that for what it’s worth.

So you are saying that, between two equally qualified applicants, the one with money to hire a consultant will be favored by admissions offices. It follows an applicant who cannot hire a consultant has to be better qualified to get the same consideration. I can see why wealthy parents would be fine with this arrangement - rich kids don’t have to be as qualified - but one would think the admissions offices would be more sensitive to the inequity.

I regret to inform you that the presence of Santa Claus is also under some suspicion.

Also worth noting that someone who does not need financial aid is, you know, not dependent upon financial aid to accept an offer of admission. Does money afford privileges in nearly all aspects of life? It sure does. Sorry to burst that bubble but please save the naive virtue signaling for a forum more receptive.

[Anonymous]

And to be clear, I’m not for a second saying that rich kids need to be less qualified. I genuinely don’t believe that.

But, the reality (horror, I know) is that a huge number of kids are substantially similar. They’re good kids with great grades and test scores, glowing recommendations, solid interviews, and thoughtful extracurricular activities. If your kid falls into that category, they are the rule, not the exception specifically in the rarified bubble strata of private school admissions in DC. It doesn’t make them less wonderful, it’s just reality.

[Anonymous]

Anyone here not get their kid into the school of choice even with a consultant? My cousin used one of the most highly recommended consultants here and his son got WL at all but one school, and that school is sadly proving to be way too academically rigorous for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless your child has specific needs, you don't need a consultant. Once you narrow down to reasonable commute, religious or secular, single sex or coed, you'll have a small enough number to tour and/or apply and see where you get in.

She’s moving from out of the area—having done that myself, I would encourage her to get a consultant—it’s a lot to figure out without one not knowing the area at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And to be clear, I’m not for a second saying that rich kids need to be less qualified. I genuinely don’t believe that.

But, the reality (horror, I know) is that a huge number of kids are substantially similar. They’re good kids with great grades and test scores, glowing recommendations, solid interviews, and thoughtful extracurricular activities. If your kid falls into that category, they are the rule, not the exception specifically in the rarified bubble strata of private school admissions in DC. It doesn’t make them less wonderful, it’s just reality.

Talk about naive! Of course wealthy kids don’t have to be as qualified. You said yourself money talks. But allowing ed consultants to influence admissions decisions adds that extra thumb on the scale for the rich kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

Yes, but applicant has to be qualified. The consultant will be able to assess which school is a better fit first.

No, the applicant has to be able to afford the consultant. Then the consultant does the assessment and recommends schools. Money first and if you don’t have it, your qualifications won’t matter.

Does it increase the chances of your child getting in? Having a consultant I mean?

As mentioned above, I think the best way to look at it is that a consultant will not help your unqualified kid get into a school that they would not have otherwise. However, a consultant with relationships in admissions can help your otherwise qualified applicant at least be seen versus other qualified kids. Take that for what it’s worth.

So you are saying that, between two equally qualified applicants, the one with money to hire a consultant will be favored by admissions offices. It follows an applicant who cannot hire a consultant has to be better qualified to get the same consideration. I can see why wealthy parents would be fine with this arrangement - rich kids don’t have to be as qualified - but one would think the admissions offices would be more sensitive to the inequity.

Yes it sounds like that is what she's saying. It also sounds accurate, alas.

It’s not accurate, nor will any admissions officer claim that their contacts will give you an edge. Have you used a consultant? We have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone here not get their kid into the school of choice even with a consultant? My cousin used one of the most highly recommended consultants here and his son got WL at all but one school, and that school is sadly proving to be way too academically rigorous for him.

Exactly. It’s because the consultant doesn’t get you in if you aren’t qualified or “use” their contacts. They look at your child’s profile and recommend schools. They also will help with essays, interviews, and suggestions for SSATs. People saying that the consultants are able to get you in because of their contacts are uninformed.

[Anonymous]

Consultant’s interests differ from yours- they will smooth talk dumb parents into certain schools for their own interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

So you are saying that if someone hires a consultant at many thousands of dollars and wants to apply to a “reach” school the consultant will refuse to work with that kid? Seems unlikely. Or do you mean the consultant takes the clients money, but then does a poor job representing said client with the school?

[Anonymous]

Merrell Cherouny, super knowledgeable, great listener, perceptive https://www.merrellcherounyeducationalconsulting.com/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly, and I'll echo that they absolutely speak with the consultants. There is an implicit "deal" where the consultants to not promote unqualified students and in exchange, seem to have a bit of sway when they actually recommend someone.

It’s pay to play and money talks. That’s how private works.

This is not actually how admission for 9th grade works, but thanks for the fan fiction