What Schools are Considered 2T?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does one single poster know enough about all 20 schools (30-40 if you count T4) to qualify as an expert in ranking them? I want to know.

I am an about to be retired private admissions advisor. I have worked with most of these schools for decades, although to be fair about five of them I’ve never had a client apply to. People can quibble over any given school plus or minus five spots. But ten point jumps aren’t sustainable arguments.

Thoughts on Marymount and Sacred Heart's college eximission? They send only about 10-15% to ivies, much lower than T2 schools like Fieldston (30%). Curious why you hesitated moving them to T4 schools, is it because they took a lot of your clients?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1 Trinity
2 Brearley
3 HM
4 Collegiate
5 Spence
6 Dalton
7 Chapin
8 Riverdale
9 Regis
10 St Ann's
11 Fieldstone
12 Marymount
13 Sacred Heart
14 Nightingale
15 Friends Seminary
16 GCS
17 Packer
18 Poly
19 Loyola
20 Avenues
21 BFS
22 BC
23 Basis
24 Hewitt
25 Trevor
26 Calhoun
27 Hackley
28 Lycée
29 UNIS
30 Xavier
31 Fordham Prep
32 Notre Dame
33 DA
34 SVF
35 Dwight

Do Regis, Marymount, and CSH actually underperform relative to their reputations when it comes to college placement? Regis in particular surprises me. My assumption would be that if you looked only at students who were admitted in 9th grade for K-12—and excluded K entrants—most of these other schools’ matriculation outcomes would look stronger.

[Anonymous]

Regis is free for all who are admitted and attracts families from all socioeconomic backgrounds. Some students may be attending the college that provides the most aid or scholarships.

[Anonymous]

Also lots of Regis kids would rather be at Georgetown/ND/BC than a Cornell or JHU. Also I just looked and they're continuing to update the instagram page - another Penn yesterday. If that's what people are going by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 Trinity
2 Brearley
3 HM
4 Collegiate
5 Spence
6 Dalton
7 Chapin
8 Riverdale
9 Regis
10 St Ann's
11 Fieldstone
12 Marymount
13 Sacred Heart
14 Nightingale
15 Friends Seminary
16 GCS
17 Packer
18 Poly
19 Loyola
20 Avenues
21 BFS
22 BC
23 Basis
24 Hewitt
25 Trevor
26 Calhoun
27 Hackley
28 Lycée
29 UNIS
30 Xavier
31 Fordham Prep
32 Notre Dame
33 DA
34 SVF
35 Dwight

Do Regis, Marymount, and CSH actually underperform relative to their reputations when it comes to college placement? Regis in particular surprises me. My assumption would be that if you looked only at students who were admitted in 9th grade for K-12—and excluded K entrants—most of these other schools’ matriculation outcomes would look stronger.

From the other thread

School (N/yr): Ivy+WASP; H/Y/P/S/M; Ivy+ | Years
Nightingale (57): 33%; 6%; 28% | 2021-2025
Regis (130): 25%; 6%; 22% | 2022-2025
Sacred Heart (56): 16%; 3%; 15% | 2021-2025
Marymount (50): 14%; 3%; 13% | 2020-2024

Regis should go below Nightingale, CSH/Marymount somewhere else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also lots of Regis kids would rather be at Georgetown/ND/BC than a Cornell or JHU. Also I just looked and they're continuing to update the instagram page - another Penn yesterday. If that's what people are going by.

But they'd all rather go to HYPSM? And Regis gets half the % into HYPSM than Riverdale?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This looks like a very specific DC Urban Moms / NYC private-school parent prestige ranking, not a ranking of current academic quality or where families are applying today.

A few things jump out immediately:

1. Trevor at #35 is wildly out of sync with current reality

That’s the biggest thing.

Whether someone loves Trevor or not, putting it:

* below Dwight
* below Calhoun
* below Lycée
* below UNIS
* below Xavier
* below Fordham Prep
* below Notre Dame

would surprise most people involved in Manhattan admissions today.

This feels like a ranking frozen around the early 2000s, when Trevor had a much weaker reputation.

2. Nightingale is too low

Nightingale at #14 is hard to justify.

Most current observers would place Nightingale closer to:

* Dalton
* Spence
* Chapin
* Sacred Heart

than to schools ranked 15–25.

3. Sacred Heart is too low

Same issue.

Many NYC families would rank Sacred Heart above:

* Marymount
* Grace Church
* Packer
* Poly
* Avenues

without much hesitation.

4. Avenues is probably too low

Avenues is polarizing, but #19 feels low.

Many current families would place it somewhere in the 10–15 range.

5. Grace Church is probably too low

Grace at #16 feels low given current demand and outcomes.

6. The top is mostly old-school prestige

The placement of:

* Trinity
* Collegiate
* Dalton
* Spence
* Brearley
* Horace Mann
* Chapin

is very much a traditional prestige ranking.

You can argue over the exact order, but that’s clearly the logic.

What the ranking is really measuring

If I had to guess, this ranking is measuring:

“If you gathered wealthy NYC private-school alumni aged 50–75 and asked them to rank schools by prestige.”

For that purpose, it actually makes sense.

That’s why:

* Trevor is #35.
* Grace is #16.
* Avenues is #19.
* Nightingale is #14.
* Sacred Heart is #13.

Those schools have improved dramatically relative to where they sat in the old hierarchy.

My biggest disagreement

If we’re talking 2025–2026 perception among active Manhattan parents, I’d probably move:

Up

* Nightingale
* Sacred Heart
* Grace Church
* Avenues
* Trevor

Down

* Loyola (slightly)
* Xavier
* Notre Dame
* Dwight
* UNIS

The Trevor placement is the one that makes me think the list is mostly historical prestige. I could see reasonable people putting Trevor at #10, #15, even #20. But #35 says more about where Trevor was a generation ago than where it is today.

So my overall take is:

As a historical-prestige ranking: 8/10.
As a current-market Manhattan parent ranking: maybe 5/10.

The further down the list you go, the more it seems to undervalue schools whose reputations have risen in the last 10–20 years.

Trevor isn't getting in the top 10-15 and Nightingale isn't move up much from 14.

To me, those schools are where admission advisors want to tell their clients are good and upcoming schools to explain why they didn't get into a top 10/20 school.
(nothing against those two schools we looked at them very closely and thought they would fit for our kids but found something slightly more appropriate)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

That CSH poster was implying CSH has such a good reputation that it should have higher SAT scores, my point is that its rep isn’t that great and is inline with its scores. CSH was ranked pretty fairly based on scores tbh

Ranking 30-40 schools isn’t that ridiculous when USNews ranks thousands, and those 30-40 have way more variance than the top 40 colleges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

That CSH poster was implying CSH has such a good reputation that it should have higher SAT scores, my point is that its rep isn’t that great and is inline with its scores. CSH was ranked pretty fairly based on scores tbh

Ranking 30-40 schools isn’t that ridiculous when USNews ranks thousands, and those 30-40 have way more variance than the top 40 colleges

Ok, I don't know who is who now. Are you the admission advisor?
Ranking 30-40 schools based on objective metrics isn't ridiculous at all. Ranking them by her own prestige rating is another story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

That CSH poster was implying CSH has such a good reputation that it should have higher SAT scores, my point is that its rep isn’t that great and is inline with its scores. CSH was ranked pretty fairly based on scores tbh

Ranking 30-40 schools isn’t that ridiculous when USNews ranks thousands, and those 30-40 have way more variance than the top 40 colleges

Ok, I don't know who is who now. Are you the admission advisor?
Ranking 30-40 schools based on objective metrics isn't ridiculous at all. Ranking them by her own prestige rating is another story.

I am not the advisor. I’d be skeptical of anyone anonymously saying they are an advisor. I don’t think it’s ridiculous for one to rank the schools based on what they’ve seen in terms of competitiveness and deep knowledge of the schools. If rankings were only based on student teacher ratios and SATs then we’d have no need for a discussion. And sure, there is some subjectivity. But anyone who puts Trevor at 35 or at 10 created a bogus list and should be ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

That CSH poster was implying CSH has such a good reputation that it should have higher SAT scores, my point is that its rep isn’t that great and is inline with its scores. CSH was ranked pretty fairly based on scores tbh

Ranking 30-40 schools isn’t that ridiculous when USNews ranks thousands, and those 30-40 have way more variance than the top 40 colleges

Ok, I don't know who is who now. Are you the admission advisor?
Ranking 30-40 schools based on objective metrics isn't ridiculous at all. Ranking them by her own prestige rating is another story.

I am not the advisor. I’d be skeptical of anyone anonymously saying they are an advisor. I don’t think it’s ridiculous for one to rank the schools based on what they’ve seen in terms of competitiveness and deep knowledge of the schools. If rankings were only based on student teacher ratios and SATs then we’d have no need for a discussion. And sure, there is some subjectivity. But anyone who puts Trevor at 35 or at 10 created a bogus list and should be ignored.

Ok. I am not the trevor poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's supposed to be a prestige ranking but the problem is the prestige is only based on a few urban moms. It's not based on objective criterias. For academics, I'd look at the average SAT scores to see if a particular school is solid. Then look at college eximission to see if it's a match to DC's goal. Whether or not it's prestigeous on dcum is irrelevant.

Average SATs largely line up with prestige for private schools. You will not find numerous examples of the two diverging. These are some of the smartest, most competitive parents on earth (for better and often for worse). They are doing their due diligence.

This is also not true—I just looked up the sat scores for a few of these schools. Some of them are in 1300 range, including CSH. I don’t have time otherwise I would do a SAT score ranking for these schools.

The consensus doesn’t consider CSH TT and it never has, with most saying it is 2T/3T. As others here have noted, it’s pretty weak but a good experience. If you were to say Dalton has 1300 range, then yes the prestige-score divergence would be real.

The PP wasn't talking about TT only. The alleged "admissions advisor" was ranking 30-40 schools based on her personal prestige rating. She also asserts that her own prestige ratings for these 30-40 schools align well with objective metrics so there is no need to rely on objective metrics.

That CSH poster was implying CSH has such a good reputation that it should have higher SAT scores, my point is that its rep isn’t that great and is inline with its scores. CSH was ranked pretty fairly based on scores tbh

Ranking 30-40 schools isn’t that ridiculous when USNews ranks thousands, and those 30-40 have way more variance than the top 40 colleges

Ok, I don't know who is who now. Are you the admission advisor?
Ranking 30-40 schools based on objective metrics isn't ridiculous at all. Ranking them by her own prestige rating is another story.

I am not the advisor. I’d be skeptical of anyone anonymously saying they are an advisor. I don’t think it’s ridiculous for one to rank the schools based on what they’ve seen in terms of competitiveness and deep knowledge of the schools. If rankings were only based on student teacher ratios and SATs then we’d have no need for a discussion. And sure, there is some subjectivity. But anyone who puts Trevor at 35 or at 10 created a bogus list and should be ignored.

Ok. I am not the trevor poster.

I don’t think they’ve posted in awhile. They sure made an impact and made people think the school way more than it deserves