Why do schools give preference to siblings? What's the logic?

[Anonymous]

Real simple.

Priority applicants: Alumni, Staff, Siblings = ~1/2 admits
Everyone else: ~1/2 admits


If there are 100 total applications for 24 spots and 33 of them are "priorities" then approximately 1/2 will be admitted. That means there are 66 non-priorities (ie no affiliations) for the remaining 12 spots.

It isn't that complicated and it isn't unreasonable.

[Anonymous]

I think it really depends on grade. PreK/K may be heavier wrt priority admissions (although ADs will try to spread admissions over those two years, urging some folks to have their kids stay in preschool for PreK, redshirting others to make room for new families each year). In older grades, priority admits may be few and far between (most are already in or elsewhere).

[Anonymous]

Maybe this is a tacky question, but just how many schools have that many families clambering to get in? Or is this just an issue for a half dozen or so? There seem to be a helluva lot of private schools in this area and, not surprisingly, people generally speak highly of theirs. I can't believe that demand greatly exceeds supply in most cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this is a tacky question, but just how many schools have that many families clambering to get in? Or is this just an issue for a half dozen or so? There seem to be a helluva lot of private schools in this area and, not surprisingly, people generally speak highly of theirs. I can't believe that demand greatly exceeds supply in most cases.

Definitely not a tacky question -- a really good one I have heard though that some schools can get several hundred applications for just a couple dozen spots, so I think the competition and low percentage chance of admission is real. On the other hand, many families apply to multiple schools, which inflates the number of total applications. In the end, all those kids end up somewhere, so total supply and demand for all private schools might not be too unevenly matched. However, supply/demand for certain highly-sought-after schools might be very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

N = all available slots. The sibling either meets the hurdle or does not - binary decision. X = # of siblings that apply. Let's say 80% meet the hurdle and get accepted. N - .8*X = remaining slots holding diversity and gender constant. If 1/2 the applicants are siblings and 1/2 non siblings and the total number of applicants is about 2x the number of total spots (to keep the math simple) that suggests to me that non siblings have at best a 20% probability of acceptance vs. siblings.

I'm not quite sure I followed your calculation. Are you assuming that siblings have first dibs on all available slots, and could (in theory) fill all the slots to the exclusion of non-siblings? If so, I think you're mistaken. I have heard/read that while many schools are willing to grade sibling admissions on a slight curve, they do not want any class to be dominated by siblings. This is total third-hand info, but I have heard that many schools want no more than half a class to be siblings. They actively want "fresh blood" for the other half of the class. Thus, while some siblings might (in theory) face relaxed requirements for admissions, once half the class is filled with siblings, any other siblings might actually face steeper odds against admission. In practice, I suspect that there are plenty of highly-qualified siblings each season, so any sibling advantage is really marginal.

Sheridan will automatically admit all siblings. In fact, they even given advance notificaiton and require a binding contract sooner than the rest of the applicant pool. The class make-up on factors like gender can be very unbalanced as a result.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Yes, I do have children, just 1. A boy. Age 5. In hindsight, I was so naive about the whole process. The subtext of my conversations with ADs has been that "this was a very difficult year for non sibling, non diversity boys despite some of these kids being very qualified and please don't be discouraged and definitely apply again next year for first grade, when the sibling issue should be less of a factor."

[Anonymous]

OP - that was the response I got several years ago. We did reapply and I got the same response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

N = all available slots. The sibling either meets the hurdle or does not - binary decision. X = # of siblings that apply. Let's say 80% meet the hurdle and get accepted. N - .8*X = remaining slots holding diversity and gender constant. If 1/2 the applicants are siblings and 1/2 non siblings and the total number of applicants is about 2x the number of total spots (to keep the math simple) that suggests to me that non siblings have at best a 20% probability of acceptance vs. siblings.

I'm not quite sure I followed your calculation. Are you assuming that siblings have first dibs on all available slots, and could (in theory) fill all the slots to the exclusion of non-siblings? If so, I think you're mistaken. I have heard/read that while many schools are willing to grade sibling admissions on a slight curve, they do not want any class to be dominated by siblings. This is total third-hand info, but I have heard that many schools want no more than half a class to be siblings. They actively want "fresh blood" for the other half of the class. Thus, while some siblings might (in theory) face relaxed requirements for admissions, once half the class is filled with siblings, any other siblings might actually face steeper odds against admission. In practice, I suspect that there are plenty of highly-qualified siblings each season, so any sibling advantage is really marginal.

Sheridan will automatically admit all siblings. In fact, they even given advance notificaiton and require a binding contract sooner than the rest of the applicant pool. The class make-up on factors like gender can be very unbalanced as a result.

OK, so here's where I am having trouble following OP's calculation. To keep the math simple, let's assume Sheridan has 20 student slots available, and only 100 applicants. If half the applicants (50) are generally siblings, and 80% of those (40) are admitted on average, then the entire Sheridan class will be 100% filled by siblings every year (with another 20 sibling applicants on the wait list ready to seize any spots that open up). I don't know much about Sheridan, but I'd be amazed to learn that its entire entering class is routinely composed of siblings. Either I'm not understanding the calculation, or there is a flaw somewhere in the logic (probably the former).

[Anonymous]

The sibling number you suggest is not as high. Most kids are spaced 2-4 years apart. So for K there might be 6-14 sibling applicants for a K class that admits 18-24 depending on the school. The remaining applicant pool (86-94) will be competing for the remaining spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Yes, I do have children, just 1. A boy. Age 5. In hindsight, I was so naive about the whole process. The subtext of my conversations with ADs has been that "this was a very difficult year for non sibling, non diversity boys despite some of these kids being very qualified and please don't be discouraged and definitely apply again next year for first grade, when the sibling issue should be less of a factor."

We heard that through the grapevine during the app process. We were fortunate and our DS was admitted to our first choice. But we had made our peace that he may not be admitted to our first choice, spread our apps around, and hoped he would get in somewhere.

[Anonymous]

I think the flaw is in the presumed number of sibling applicants. I know at our school the number of sibling applicants is more in the 6-10 range for a pre-k class of 25, with probably 75 applicants. If an incoming class is only 20 (in your example), hard to see how that would generate 50 sibling applicants in subsequent years. Not all kids have siblings, not all will apply, and even accounting for age gaps in siblings I think you probably wouldn't see more than 10 in a given year.

I do recall from info provided by Sidwell at an open house that the acceptance rate for priority applicants (siblings, alum children and fac/staff children) was c. 40% and the acceptance rate for non priority applicants was somewhere in the 15% range if I am remembering the numbers right.

[Anonymous]

OK, I just read OP's assumptions more closely, and I think I understand now. Assuming 20 student slots, OP is assuming 40 total applications, half from siblings (20) and half from non-siblings (20). OP further assumes some objective criteria for admission, which 80% of siblings (16) will meet. Thus, in the average class, there are only 4 slots left over for non-siblings. So the average final class each year is 16 siblings and 4 non-siblings.

I see three assumptions I think are incorrect (to some degree or other): (1) that there are simple objective criteria, (2) that siblings get first dibs on any open slots, and (3) that schools make no effort to bring in fresh blood. I'm sure every school is different in how it makes admissions decisions, so OP's analysis might be perfectly correct for some schools, but way off-base for others.

However, even if OP is correct for a particular school, I think the sibling-preference system she describes must eventually crash because the sibling families at that school can produce only a diminishing number of future students, and the non-sibling families would need to produce a whole mess of babies to keep up the sibling numbers over time. It seems like one of those steady-state calculations from chemistry class. And I'm not smart enough to figure out the equilibrium point without investing more time than I have available right now.

[Anonymous]

10:36 here again. Others make a good point that assuming 50% of applicants are siblings might be an incorrect assumption as well.

[Anonymous]

Some schools have higher or lower sibling preference than others. You know what I think? Assuming the first kid is doing well and the family can pay the tuition, the sibling has a better chance because:

1) It's good for families
2) The school already knows the parents and likes them because they are not complete tools like the PP with the long mathematical exposition. Geeez! DC parents can be a little tightly wound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some schools have higher or lower sibling preference than others. You know what I think? Assuming the first kid is doing well and the family can pay the tuition, the sibling has a better chance because:

1) It's good for families
2) The school already knows the parents and likes them because they are not complete tools like the PP with the long mathematical exposition. Geeez! DC parents can be a little tightly wound.

Ha! Maybe a little harsh, yet a little accurate. I think some folks don't realize that the schools are looking for members of a community and tightly wound may not be the best attribute for a community member.