If schools made last year's admissions data widely available, would this be helpful to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"I think that schools owe us a lot more openness about what they do. "

Why? If you're a parent or board member, fine. If you're just an applicant (or worse, potential applicant) they owe you nothing other than fair consideration in exchange for your application fee. You compete, they choose. This is how supply and demand works, and they don't owe the masses a thing. And if I were an admissions officer, I'd put a big black mark next to anyone who indicated otherwise - the last thing these people want in their schools are pushy, entitled parents.

Actually, as an economist, I'd have to say that supply and demand works best when all the parties have full information. I don't think it's entitlement to want to know these things -- you check for past returns on your stock investments, or what's in your cereal box, don't you? That's why we have the government forcing companies to tell you what's in your cereal box, or what your mutual fund fees are. Not that I'd suggest government-mandated reporting for private schools (although it does exist for schools that take federal money, I believe), although I do think it would be nice if they did it voluntarily (LOL!!!).

[Anonymous]

I do wish the affirmative action issue had been brought up in this thread from the start. For the first two pages of this thread people seemed to be skirting the real issue, which seems to concern stats about affirmative action. I strongly support affirmative action, BTW, and I don't think myself that I want to see stats about it publicized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:38 - 14:36, are you all posting to the correct thread? Are you multiple people? This thread was not really about affirmative action. Did I miss the connection, or were your posts a total shift in topic?

There are at least three of us! And there's been cross-pollination with another thread that spun off from this one (AA mom's question), questioning people's assumptions about the relationship between race, academic ability, and private school admissions. I assumed (but I'm just guessing) that 13:38's post was an attempt to bring the discussion full circle, but yeah, it reads like something of a non-sequitor if you haven't been following both threads.

I'm pretty sure there are two, but I don't know about three. There is one really angry sledgehammer of a mom who is going around calling people names, and I wouldn't put it past her to echo her own posts.

[Anonymous]

18:41 here. Wow, now that I look at it, it was actually three threads cross-pollinating. Two spin-offs (AA mom here and this one) from the original UPSET thread.

FWIW, I thought the agenda on this thread was to shift the discourse from the sadness of rejected families to the question of whether/what info private schools had a duty t disclose. In that context, I assumed that the grievance was more about insiders of various sorts than about race conscious admissions (because the whole priority admissions thing is more mysterious and variable, whereas the racial composition of the various student bodies is generally readily available).

So, now that I think about it, coming full circle would involve posting on the UPSET thread rather than here. Clearly, I respond to individual posts and don't make much of an effort to keep the threads straight!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:18:41 here. Wow, now that I look at it, it was actually three threads cross-pollinating. Two spin-offs (AA mom here and this one) from the original UPSET thread.

FWIW, I thought the agenda on this thread was to shift the discourse from the sadness of rejected families to the question of whether/what info private schools had a duty t disclose. In that context, I assumed that the grievance was more about insiders of various sorts than about race conscious admissions (because the whole priority admissions thing is more mysterious and variable, whereas the racial composition of the various student bodies is generally readily available).

So, now that I think about it, coming full circle would involve posting on the UPSET thread rather than here. Clearly, I respond to individual posts and don't make much of an effort to keep the threads straight!

This was my understanding, too - if the concern is about a seemingly random process, then what can we do about it? The race issue didn't jump out at me, but now that it's been mentioned I can see it.

So the question seems to be, should we know the affirmative action stats?

[Anonymous]

I think 13:38, 14:01, and 14:35 are different people. I'm 14:01 (and not either of the others). So if 13:38 knows she's not 14:35 (or vice versa), there are at least three of us.

[Anonymous]

But if sledgehammer mom was behind both posts, then surely she will deny it?

Anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to publish affirmative action data.

[Anonymous]

I think schools school give the overall number of applicants per slots per grade for the past five years annualized and add footnotes where relevant. For instance some years the applicant pool has a stronger set of boy applicants, so boys in the pool have to standoout and/or fit more. By fit I mean fit the desired composition in general but especially for expansion classes, where admissions officers want to make sure the accepted candidates will enhance the existing class. I do not think schools should release diversity stats.

[Anonymous]

13:38 alone

What data do you want disclosed by admission officers to families that are rejected or on waiting lists?

What goes on in the admission process at Beauvoir, St Albans, Sidwell is essentially the same phenomena as Grottlesex and the IVYs?

What is affirmative action? This is a phenomena that has existed for centuries in American Academie...all the way from preK to college.

Thus, what data (specifics) does this forum want from admission officers to ease the supply/demand pain of admission to elite educational institutions?

13:38

[Anonymous]

OOOOOPs. I'm a 4th poster in there... and I'll admit to blending the threads by accident. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Data from the past five years on a variety of outcomes (test scores and some other data that's been suggested here would help families understand what they were getting into before they filled out the applications and did the interviews. Knowing it all at the time you get rejected is too late.

[Anonymous]

Test scores-high
Income-high
Socio-economic status-high
Legacy status-high

In fact, this information is not highly secured. For decades families not meeting these criteria have not even bothered to apply to elite schools as you suggest (self-imposed affirmative action)

13:38

[Anonymous]

Do you really just want test scores and admit rates?

E.g. kid w/WPPSI in the 99th percentile, 25% chance of admission in 2002, 28% in 2003, etc?

Or do you want girl w/WPPSI in the 99th percentile
or white girl w/WPPSI in the 99th percentile
or white girl in priority pool w/WPPSI in the 99th percentile
or white girl w/WPPSI in 99th percentile requesting financial aid?

[Anonymous]

Stop freaking out. It's a simple queston about making more information available. Greater transparency and accountability. That's all. The answer, yes that's helpful. Helpful for parents and schools.

[Anonymous]

Complaining and whining without concrete specific solutions to the problem does not remedy the situation but we will serve as your sounding board nevertheless

13:38