Why the lack of VTech for Sidwell Seniors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect there aren’t many Sidwell students from Virginia, and VT isn’t as appealing as an out of state option compared to places like Pitt and the others you mentioned.

Agree. VT is great, but when my kid saw all that Pitt had to offer, he was more excited. And they're pretty equivalent schools, with each stronger in a few areas (VT stronger in some engineering, Pitt stronger in biomedical engineering, premed, nursing and anythign medical).

VT is higher ranked in undergrad engineering. It's also a higher ranked school in general.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/virginia-tech-3754/overall-rankings
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-pittsburgh-3379/overall-rankings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the usual troll who always refers to VT as "VTech." Very transparent.

🙄 It's the usual pedantic parent who is for some reason obsessed with meaningless differences in word choice. I don't think I've ever seen the same level of repeated pedantry from any other school.

^^ It's the usual parent who works "pedantry" into all of her posts.

[Anonymous]

Pitt gets a lot of premeds from Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cannot believe there was a matriculation from Sidwell to JMU. Parents must be reeling.

This is so rude - it could have been financial reasons, wanting to stay close to home, etc.

+1
Or *gasp* - they could have simply loved the school. Like so many others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an obvious answer. The student body is not wealthy enough to be an appealing option for students from a prestigious private school. Parents don’t want their kids to marry down and the dating pool of students from families in the top 1% of the income distribution is too small at Tech. Why would you want your kid to go to school where only 3% of the students come from very affluent families. They will not marry well at a school like that.

Curious where you're getting your facts and figures. Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an obvious answer. The student body is not wealthy enough to be an appealing option for students from a prestigious private school. Parents don’t want their kids to marry down and the dating pool of students from families in the top 1% of the income distribution is too small at Tech. Why would you want your kid to go to school where only 3% of the students come from very affluent families. They will not marry well at a school like that.

NP. Interesting angle. What about Wisconsin? The kids there were overall very attractive. How many are top 1% at Wisconsin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an obvious answer. The student body is not wealthy enough to be an appealing option for students from a prestigious private school. Parents don’t want their kids to marry down and the dating pool of students from families in the top 1% of the income distribution is too small at Tech. Why would you want your kid to go to school where only 3% of the students come from very affluent families. They will not marry well at a school like that.

NP. Interesting angle. What about Wisconsin? The kids there were overall very attractive. How many are top 1% at Wisconsin?

I can't wait to see what the PPP's "source" is for this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the usual troll who always refers to VT as "VTech." Very transparent.

NP. I will never understand why people from that school are soooo touchy about spelling. The folks from most other schools just aren't so twitchy about spelling.

+1. You don’t see CWM boosters get upset when people drop the College and just refer to it as W&M.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the usual troll who always refers to VT as "VTech." Very transparent.

NP. I will never understand why people from that school are soooo touchy about spelling. The folks from most other schools just aren't so twitchy about spelling.

+1. You don’t see CWM boosters get upset when people drop the College and just refer to it as W&M.

To be fair, the college refers to itself as W&M. VA Tech does not refer to itself as VTech. That said, it’s very clear from context whether anyone is referring to the school or the electronic toy company, so making a point of calling it out every time is silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect there aren’t many Sidwell students from Virginia, and VT isn’t as appealing as an out of state option compared to places like Pitt and the others you mentioned.

Which would make sense except for the fact that both UVA and W&M which are both smaller (both almost half the size or less than VT) are bolded on the list.

Well, these kids prefer UVA and W&M over VT. Not sure what else there is to say about it!

The Wall Street Journal ranks Virginia Tech higher than either UVA or William & Mary.

It’s a heavily STEM focused school, however. The “elites” from Sidwell and other privates haven’t caught on yet and are stuck on tradition rather than the changing economy.

Is this the same Wall Street Journal that had Babson above Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, and Stanford?

Continue to stay stuck in the past with USN&WR. IYKYK

Time to take you back to the retirement home isn't it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the usual troll who always refers to VT as "VTech." Very transparent.

NP. I will never understand why people from that school are soooo touchy about spelling. The folks from most other schools just aren't so twitchy about spelling.

+1. You don’t see CWM boosters get upset when people drop the College and just refer to it as W&M.

That's because no one ever says "CWM." Just as no one says "VTech."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect there aren’t many Sidwell students from Virginia, and VT isn’t as appealing as an out of state option compared to places like Pitt and the others you mentioned.

Agree. VT is great, but when my kid saw all that Pitt had to offer, he was more excited. And they're pretty equivalent schools, with each stronger in a few areas (VT stronger in some engineering, Pitt stronger in biomedical engineering, premed, nursing and anythign medical).

VT is higher ranked in undergrad engineering. It's also a higher ranked school in general.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/virginia-tech-3754/overall-rankings
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-pittsburgh-3379/overall-rankings

Uh, yeah, the post literally said that VT is ranked higher in some engineering, but it's not higher in biomedical engineering.

In terms of biomedical engineering, edurank (based on research impact), Pitt is #5 in the world, higher than most ivies and other engineering powerhouses like Georgia Tech, Hopkins, etc.
https://edurank.org/engineering/bioengineering/us/

And Pitt is way higher in other fields such as nursing.

The point of the post was that both are terrific schools, and each has their strengths, and for VT that's many (but not all) fields of engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an obvious answer. The student body is not wealthy enough to be an appealing option for students from a prestigious private school. Parents don’t want their kids to marry down and the dating pool of students from families in the top 1% of the income distribution is too small at Tech. Why would you want your kid to go to school where only 3% of the students come from very affluent families. They will not marry well at a school like that.

NP. Interesting angle. What about Wisconsin? The kids there were overall very attractive. How many are top 1% at Wisconsin?

I can't wait to see what the PPP's "source" is for this nonsense.

This is a reputable source. An NYT interactive article about the income composition of colleges based on social mobility research data. Nope, Wisconsin is an even worse choice if you want to maintain your kids/future grandkids social status. Only 1.7% of the University of Wisconsin student body come from families in the top 1% of the income distribution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an obvious answer. The student body is not wealthy enough to be an appealing option for students from a prestigious private school. Parents don’t want their kids to marry down and the dating pool of students from families in the top 1% of the income distribution is too small at Tech. Why would you want your kid to go to school where only 3% of the students come from very affluent families. They will not marry well at a school like that.

NP. Interesting angle. What about Wisconsin? The kids there were overall very attractive. How many are top 1% at Wisconsin?

I can't wait to see what the PPP's "source" is for this nonsense.

This is a reputable source. An NYT interactive article about the income composition of colleges based on social mobility research data. Nope, Wisconsin is an even worse choice if you want to maintain your kids/future grandkids social status. Only 1.7% of the University of Wisconsin student body come from families in the top 1% of the income distribution.

Think about this logically people. A lot of these kids from very wealthy families. Their children don’t necessarily need to work (even though most kids do work). The biggest worry for these parents is maintaining what their family already has. Ensuring that your kid doesn’t marry down (too much) is more important that making sure that your kid attends the best engineering program. It’s better for your kid to study a useless degree at an (affluent) SLAC and marry into a similarly wealthy family than marry into a middle class family at a good engineering school. This is unspoken truth of American Society. Very rich people pretend to be egalitarian in public, but their actual behavior they encourage for their own children is reminiscent of Victorian England.

[Anonymous]

My kid (diff DC private) was choosing between VT and Pitt, and went with VT.

Not because of rankings, just preferred the overall energy of VT.