What about cheating at the HS level?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a high school, but in a college, they have an "appreciation" dinner right before casting for a music department event. The parents of the kids in the running for the lead are seated with the director of development. I kid you not.

What college has parents involved in that way? Seems absurd and utterly implausible to me.

Parent " get to know you" luncheons with the HOS with Advancement as well as Admissions in attendance happen each year in DC Privates.

This begins in Pre-K

If you thought that you were just being invited in small groups to for you to get to know the HOS, YOU were oblivious.


Those small luncheons or small dinner chats are carefully organized . Hint: invites don't go in alphabetical order and are not a random group.

The AD and Advancement Head cherry pick and plan each meeting and fully brief the HOS before hand so the HOS knows who he/she will be " having the opportunity to get to know" and this begins the oh so polite vetting of who among the new grade level of parents will be:

* future donors for big projects

* tapped for a board seat

* tapped to be a PA Mom or a Grade level class leader to keep other parents in line

* who will run the Auction

Do you think these schools are Democracies ??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And my point is, why are you in a position to make judgments about who should and shouldn't take advantage of certain privileges associated with wealth, connections, etc. (short of breaking the law)?

DP: I read the PP's point as akin to the college scandal fraud of claiming that the student is a champion rower worthy of a spot on the crew team. At the high school level, if a kid never participated in activity X in his life, and his donor parents insist that come college application time he be appointed Chief Dedicated Expert in Charge of activity X, that is fraud. And it is not a victimless crime as witnessed by the kids who have been passionately involved in that activity since middle school, who deserve, but don't get to put that top position on their resume.

I recall a poster years ago complaining about certain wealthy boys being named 'Editors' of a Big 3 publication, who had never been involved before, over the kids who had been dedicated to the publication for many years. And there were multiple "Executive Editors" that year instead of the traditional one. There was a thread here about it. Maybe someone can find it.

OP here, thank you! Finally someone with some reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I am. I just think the wealthy at a private school being infuriated at the super-wealthy at a private school shows a lack of self-awareness. It's just a very weird place to draw the line ("THIS is where I draw the line on whether being rich should give you an advantage") when 99% of America is already way behind you.

Such a good point. The "it's okay for me to take advantage of my privilege, but someone more rich/connected exerting their uber-privilege?" pearl-clutching is a bit ironic.

Yep. OP, you need to examine your own privileges before casting shade on everyone else’s.

I fully admit I had privileges. My point was that high schools can be just as complicit as the colleges in this pay to play game for college acceptance.

+1

There's a ton of mediocre rich kids in these "elite" DC area privates. Now you know why.

+1

It is always so amusing to read the "chip on their shoulder" public magnet parents, "donut-hole" parents and "I attended an elite prep school 25 years ago but would never send my kids there" parents passing judgment on the talent of kids and the academic rigor of top DCUM privates. Their resentment comes through as sour grapes. This is an area with an extremely educated population. Do you really think that many or most of the kids in these schools are morons? The number of spots in these schools is small, the number trying to get in is large. There may be an occasional legacy or kid of the president with a slightly lower academic profile, but they have to be good enough to take many of the same classes with academic all-stars. Most of the families are professionals who worked their way to prosperity through intelligence and hard work (IMF, World Bank, medicine, law, etc.). Many immigrant parents; plenty who grew up working or middle class and turned their own Ivy/SLAC education into enough money or savvy to apply for FA. The kids at our Big 3 are almost all very smart and incredibly hard-working. No one is buying their college admissions, and no one needs to.

[Anonymous]

All this stuff that wealthy people do to try to get their kids into top schools, whether it is illegal (like the bribery scandal) or legal (spending a tens of thousands of dollars on private high schools, tutors, test prep, etc) -- it all just reeks of desperation. It's like the parents don't have any confidence in their kids ability to be admitted on. It's like they know that if there's a straight up competition on merit, their DC will lose. Most people who go to the best universities spent exactly zero dollars on high school tuition and very little on test preparation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I am. I just think the wealthy at a private school being infuriated at the super-wealthy at a private school shows a lack of self-awareness. It's just a very weird place to draw the line ("THIS is where I draw the line on whether being rich should give you an advantage") when 99% of America is already way behind you.

Such a good point. The "it's okay for me to take advantage of my privilege, but someone more rich/connected exerting their uber-privilege?" pearl-clutching is a bit ironic.

Yep. OP, you need to examine your own privileges before casting shade on everyone else’s.

I fully admit I had privileges. My point was that high schools can be just as complicit as the colleges in this pay to play game for college acceptance.

+1

There's a ton of mediocre rich kids in these "elite" DC area privates. Now you know why.

+1

It is always so amusing to read the "chip on their shoulder" public magnet parents, "donut-hole" parents and "I attended an elite prep school 25 years ago but would never send my kids there" parents passing judgment on the talent of kids and the academic rigor of top DCUM privates. Their resentment comes through as sour grapes. This is an area with an extremely educated population. Do you really think that many or most of the kids in these schools are morons? The number of spots in these schools is small, the number trying to get in is large. There may be an occasional legacy or kid of the president with a slightly lower academic profile, but they have to be good enough to take many of the same classes with academic all-stars. Most of the families are professionals who worked their way to prosperity through intelligence and hard work (IMF, World Bank, medicine, law, etc.). Many immigrant parents; plenty who grew up working or middle class and turned their own Ivy/SLAC education into enough money or savvy to apply for FA. The kids at our Big 3 are almost all very smart and incredibly hard-working. No one is buying their college admissions, and no one needs to.

(and we really need people to keep believing that.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I am. I just think the wealthy at a private school being infuriated at the super-wealthy at a private school shows a lack of self-awareness. It's just a very weird place to draw the line ("THIS is where I draw the line on whether being rich should give you an advantage") when 99% of America is already way behind you.

Such a good point. The "it's okay for me to take advantage of my privilege, but someone more rich/connected exerting their uber-privilege?" pearl-clutching is a bit ironic.

Yep. OP, you need to examine your own privileges before casting shade on everyone else’s.

I fully admit I had privileges. My point was that high schools can be just as complicit as the colleges in this pay to play game for college acceptance.

+1

There's a ton of mediocre rich kids in these "elite" DC area privates. Now you know why.

+1

It is always so amusing to read the "chip on their shoulder" public magnet parents, "donut-hole" parents and "I attended an elite prep school 25 years ago but would never send my kids there" parents passing judgment on the talent of kids and the academic rigor of top DCUM privates. Their resentment comes through as sour grapes. This is an area with an extremely educated population. Do you really think that many or most of the kids in these schools are morons? The number of spots in these schools is small, the number trying to get in is large. There may be an occasional legacy or kid of the president with a slightly lower academic profile, but they have to be good enough to take many of the same classes with academic all-stars. Most of the families are professionals who worked their way to prosperity through intelligence and hard work (IMF, World Bank, medicine, law, etc.). Many immigrant parents; plenty who grew up working or middle class and turned their own Ivy/SLAC education into enough money or savvy to apply for FA. The kids at our Big 3 are almost all very smart and incredibly hard-working. No one is buying their college admissions, and no one needs to.

The privates only accept the most academically gifted three-year olds -- only those three-year olds with the most impressive resumes.

[Anonymous]

It shouldn't be news to anyone that private schools are Exhibit 1 in the systematic exploitation of privilege. They are far worse in the aggregate than some actresses who worried about not spending enough time with their kids because they were on set paying a bozo some money to bribe a coach. The systemic corruption in the private schools networks is far, far worse.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, lots of privates around here that start at age 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a high school, but in a college, they have an "appreciation" dinner right before casting for a music department event. The parents of the kids in the running for the lead are seated with the director of development. I kid you not.

What college has parents involved in that way? Seems absurd and utterly implausible to me.

Parent " get to know you" luncheons with the HOS with Advancement as well as Admissions in attendance happen each year in DC Privates.

This begins in Pre-K

If you thought that you were just being invited in small groups to for you to get to know the HOS, YOU were oblivious.


Those small luncheons or small dinner chats are carefully organized . Hint: invites don't go in alphabetical order and are not a random group.

The AD and Advancement Head cherry pick and plan each meeting and fully brief the HOS before hand so the HOS knows who he/she will be " having the opportunity to get to know" and this begins the oh so polite vetting of who among the new grade level of parents will be:

* future donors for big projects

* tapped for a board seat

* tapped to be a PA Mom or a Grade level class leader to keep other parents in line

* who will run the Auction

Do you think these schools are Democracies ??

Wow. Eight years on the Close with a HHI of over 4 MM, five-figure annual donations, and we never qualified for any “get to know you event” with anyone from development or school administration. Should I feel dissed or relieved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have any answers on the question of unfair advantages but I cringe a little at the gray area that seems to be growing around this debate.

Is getting your kid a tutor akin to hiring someone to take the SAT on your kids’ behalf? Because the OP’s argument seems to be implying that by lumping everything into the “unfair advantage” category.

Don’t get me wrong, there are always inherent advantages that come with “privilege.” It has been that way since the beginning of time. I think the problem is actually that we allowed any of this to be seen as a meritocracy in a lot of ways. But I wonder when the slippery slope comes in? My kid gets lots of “advantages” in that I read to each of them every night, we eat dinner as a family, and I got off the ladder in my job to take a position with much more flexibility. Those are all advantages to my kids, for sure. Also, we are a while family who are third generation college graduates who send our kids to private school. We generally don’t rely on public transportation and have a yard to play in. All of that is a direct result of our privilege. Is that wrong? It certainly feels unfair if you are sitting in public housing trying to figure a way out.

I don’t have an answer. I know I don’t want to end up saying that all these actions are indistinguishable. There is certainly a difference between what went on in the cheating scandal and what most of us do on behalf of our kids. At the same time, I think we have to be careful that we don’t walk down a road that leads us to saying that any time dedicated or effort made on behalf of our kids is unfair.


agree +100000
Just food for thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I am. I just think the wealthy at a private school being infuriated at the super-wealthy at a private school shows a lack of self-awareness. It's just a very weird place to draw the line ("THIS is where I draw the line on whether being rich should give you an advantage") when 99% of America is already way behind you.

Such a good point. The "it's okay for me to take advantage of my privilege, but someone more rich/connected exerting their uber-privilege?" pearl-clutching is a bit ironic.

Yep. OP, you need to examine your own privileges before casting shade on everyone else’s.

I fully admit I had privileges. My point was that high schools can be just as complicit as the colleges in this pay to play game for college acceptance.

+1

There's a ton of mediocre rich kids in these "elite" DC area privates. Now you know why.

+1

It is always so amusing to read the "chip on their shoulder" public magnet parents, "donut-hole" parents and "I attended an elite prep school 25 years ago but would never send my kids there" parents passing judgment on the talent of kids and the academic rigor of top DCUM privates. Their resentment comes through as sour grapes. This is an area with an extremely educated population. Do you really think that many or most of the kids in these schools are morons? The number of spots in these schools is small, the number trying to get in is large. There may be an occasional legacy or kid of the president with a slightly lower academic profile, but they have to be good enough to take many of the same classes with academic all-stars. Most of the families are professionals who worked their way to prosperity through intelligence and hard work (IMF, World Bank, medicine, law, etc.). Many immigrant parents; plenty who grew up working or middle class and turned their own Ivy/SLAC education into enough money or savvy to apply for FA. The kids at our Big 3 are almost all very smart and incredibly hard-working. No one is buying their college admissions, and no one needs to.

This. So much this. Getting into a top DCUM private is VERY difficult (full disclosure: my kid does not attend one). I read so many of these outraged posts about how dare parents pay for SAT prep, or tutors, or what not, as BITTER haters. To blanket all private school kids as morons or undeserving (so very untrue), or to say no one should be able to take a test prep course without being labeled privileged and elitist is absurd. Private school haters, just stop. You sound like very jealous and angry people. In no universe are you going to be able to make having a tutor, authorized accomodations, or even (GASP) taking college test prep courses illegal or unallowable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, lots of privates around here that start at age 3.

Just FYI, our big 3 accepts 20 kids for preK each year. 20! Can't be brining the school down that much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I am. I just think the wealthy at a private school being infuriated at the super-wealthy at a private school shows a lack of self-awareness. It's just a very weird place to draw the line ("THIS is where I draw the line on whether being rich should give you an advantage") when 99% of America is already way behind you.

Such a good point. The "it's okay for me to take advantage of my privilege, but someone more rich/connected exerting their uber-privilege?" pearl-clutching is a bit ironic.

Yep. OP, you need to examine your own privileges before casting shade on everyone else’s.

I fully admit I had privileges. My point was that high schools can be just as complicit as the colleges in this pay to play game for college acceptance.

+1

There's a ton of mediocre rich kids in these "elite" DC area privates. Now you know why.

+1

It is always so amusing to read the "chip on their shoulder" public magnet parents, "donut-hole" parents and "I attended an elite prep school 25 years ago but would never send my kids there" parents passing judgment on the talent of kids and the academic rigor of top DCUM privates. Their resentment comes through as sour grapes. This is an area with an extremely educated population. Do you really think that many or most of the kids in these schools are morons? The number of spots in these schools is small, the number trying to get in is large. There may be an occasional legacy or kid of the president with a slightly lower academic profile, but they have to be good enough to take many of the same classes with academic all-stars. Most of the families are professionals who worked their way to prosperity through intelligence and hard work (IMF, World Bank, medicine, law, etc.). Many immigrant parents; plenty who grew up working or middle class and turned their own Ivy/SLAC education into enough money or savvy to apply for FA. The kids at our Big 3 are almost all very smart and incredibly hard-working. No one is buying their college admissions, and no one needs to.

This. So much this. Getting into a top DCUM private is VERY difficult (full disclosure: my kid does not attend one). I read so many of these outraged posts about how dare parents pay for SAT prep, or tutors, or what not, as BITTER haters. To blanket all private school kids as morons or undeserving (so very untrue), or to say no one should be able to take a test prep course without being labeled privileged and elitist is absurd. Private school haters, just stop. You sound like very jealous and angry people. In no universe are you going to be able to make having a tutor, authorized accomodations, or even (GASP) taking college test prep courses illegal or unallowable.

I wouldn't normally agree with a DCUM post, but there is some truth in these. I am an academic. Nearly all my colleagues' children go to or went to Walls or Duke Ellington. They make fun of me for sending my kid to a Big 3 on the grandparents' dime (since no academic in my field could afford it in any reasonable way). Are my kids losing something by not going to walls, will they turn out wimpy, somewhat stuck up, and unable to use the Metro properly? Perhaps. But they are certainly not dumb or not hardworking. Not everything is cut and dried, to so speak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And my point is, why are you in a position to make judgments about who should and shouldn't take advantage of certain privileges associated with wealth, connections, etc. (short of breaking the law)?

DP: I read the PP's point as akin to the college scandal fraud of claiming that the student is a champion rower worthy of a spot on the crew team. At the high school level, if a kid never participated in activity X in his life, and his donor parents insist that come college application time he be appointed Chief Dedicated Expert in Charge of activity X, that is fraud. And it is not a victimless crime as witnessed by the kids who have been passionately involved in that activity since middle school, who deserve, but don't get to put that top position on their resume.

I recall a poster years ago complaining about certain wealthy boys being named 'Editors' of a Big 3 publication, who had never been involved before, over the kids who had been dedicated to the publication for many years. And there were multiple "Executive Editors" that year instead of the traditional one. There was a thread here about it. Maybe someone can find it.

Agree. There is a difference of OP going to a private school and that school auctioning off leadership posts behind-the-scenes.

The problem is that the latter is purported to be a fair and meritocratic system, but that’s not the way it’s really done. They pretend like the kid deserved it due to capabilitiy and experience when it was really more about money.

It’s the pretense that is the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have any answers on the question of unfair advantages but I cringe a little at the gray area that seems to be growing around this debate.

Is getting your kid a tutor akin to hiring someone to take the SAT on your kids’ behalf? Because the OP’s argument seems to be implying that by lumping everything into the “unfair advantage” category.

Don’t get me wrong, there are always inherent advantages that come with “privilege.” It has been that way since the beginning of time. I think the problem is actually that we allowed any of this to be seen as a meritocracy in a lot of ways. But I wonder when the slippery slope comes in? My kid gets lots of “advantages” in that I read to each of them every night, we eat dinner as a family, and I got off the ladder in my job to take a position with much more flexibility. Those are all advantages to my kids, for sure. Also, we are a while family who are third generation college graduates who send our kids to private school. We generally don’t rely on public transportation and have a yard to play in. All of that is a direct result of our privilege. Is that wrong? It certainly feels unfair if you are sitting in public housing trying to figure a way out.

I don’t have an answer. I know I don’t want to end up saying that all these actions are indistinguishable. There is certainly a difference between what went on in the cheating scandal and what most of us do on behalf of our kids. At the same time, I think we have to be careful that we don’t walk down a road that leads us to saying that any time dedicated or effort made on behalf of our kids is unfair.

Just food for thought.

I consider college applications a business in themselves and hope they are looked at overall (especially alternatives to these tests). That being saod, I can assure you there are programs offering free tutoring to lower income children, fees are waived for the test etc. if that helps you sleep easier.