Big College Admissions Year at St. Albans

[Anonymous]

The STA class is 78 and that list is inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The STA class is 78 and that list is inaccurate.

This is a year-old thread that has been revived. That is a list from last spring (spring 2012). I recall seeing it when it was posted, and thinking it was authentic as it matched with the student-created list in the graduation-issue of the student-written newspaper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EDITED TO ADD THAT THIS WAS POSTED IN SPRING 2012, FOR THE ST. ALBANS GRADUATING CLASS OF 2012. Here are the final numbers for STA this year: (These are matriculation numbers, graduating class size of 77)

Harvard 6
Yale 5
Dartmouth 4
U Penn 4
Michigan 3
Georgetown 3
Colorado 3
Wake Forest 3
Columbia 2
BU 2
William and Mary 2
Franklin and Marshall 2
Middlebury 2
Northwestern 2
Sewanee 2
GW 2
U of Cal santa barbara 2
UVA 2
1 at Bowdoin,Charleston, Cornell, Princeton, Elon, Hartwick, Kenyon, Macalaster, Purdue, Rhodes, SMU, Stanford, St Olaf, Trinity, Tufts, Tulane, Navy, U of Chicago, Maryland, Ole Miss, St Andrews, Wisconsin, Wash U, Wesleyan

Even the lowest end of this list is strong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But I don't disagree with your points generally. As Professor Espenshade and others have opined, this doesn't mean selective colleges will abandon efforts to promote diversity. They will probably move towards a system of considering Socio-Economic Status/class, but as he also notes (in the first linked article), his study predicts this will lower the number of AA and Latino students at the most highly selective colleges significantly. The "silver lining" he sees is that it may force even more focus on equalizing educational opportunities at the younger grades. I have also heard African-American and Latino friends and colleagues say they won't miss assuming they are "products of Affirmative Action" and see that as a good outcome if affirmative action in college admission were to end.
Your point on "small" being in the eye of the beholder when it comes to legacy admissions is a good one, and to me, increases the chances that there will be enough public outcry about legacies that the Ivies and other highly selective schools may have to give up legacy admissions. (Of course, could there be a loophole for students whose parents are big donors, on the grounds that is not "just" legacy status? Maybe! )

I've also wondered if the Fisher v. Texas effect (assuming they strike down affirmative action) may trickle down to private schools. Clearly, legally private schools will not be covered (no acceptance of federal funds as is the case with private colleges). But if the Supreme Court sets a new societal norm that, as Chief Justice Roberts likes to say, you can't fight discrimination with more discrimination (which is how he sees preferences based on race), will there be more pressure for independent schools to go to a Socio-economic/class based form of diversity in admissions? That's easier for the wealthier schools with the bigger endowments, of course, than a system which gives some diversity consideration for race/ethnicity absent any consideration of parental wealth/occupation.

There will be a LOT of debate about affirmative action in education in 2013 and immediately beyond, I predict -- most at the college level but some perhaps trickling down to the private schools.

Please don't try to give the impression that your "I've got mine, you get your yours" friends are representative of how AA's feel about affirmative action. It only shows that your AA friends are not that bright and are insecure. You do not hear the legacy babies talking about how they wish legacies would end so that people don't assume they are a product of a "legacy admission." Instead, some of the legacies I know will self-identify that they are legacies and how many generations of legacy they are. I was a recruited woman at one of the service academies and I don't know any of us who would never have said "please don't recruit more women because we don't want people to assume we are the product of special recruitment." We didn't want to one of a handful of women at the Academy so we could feel special because we could get in and others couldn't. I was the "Norman Rockwell" AA student in elementary and I definitely wish there had been some affirmative action. Being one or a few of many is not conducive to educational attainment.

[Anonymous]

Please don't try to give the impression that your "I've got mine, you get your yours" friends are representative of how AA's feel about affirmative action. It only shows that your AA friends are not that bright and are insecure. You do not hear the legacy babies talking about how they wish legacies would end so that people don't assume they are a product of a "legacy admission." Instead, some of the legacies I know will self-identify that they are legacies and how many generations of legacy they are. I was a recruited woman at one of the service academies and I don't know any of us who would never have said "please don't recruit more women because we don't want people to assume we are the product of special recruitment." We didn't want to one of a handful of women at the Academy so we could feel special because we could get in and others couldn't. I was the "Norman Rockwell" AA student in elementary and I definitely wish there had been some affirmative action. Being one or a few of many is not conducive to educational attainment.


good point.

[Anonymous]

I've also wondered if the Fisher v. Texas effect (assuming they strike down affirmative action) may trickle down to private schools. Clearly, legally private schools will not be covered (no acceptance of federal funds as is the case with private colleges). But if the Supreme Court sets a new societal norm that, as Chief Justice Roberts likes to say, you can't fight discrimination with more discrimination (which is how he sees preferences based on race), will there be more pressure for independent schools to go to a Socio-economic/class based form of diversity in admissions? That's easier for the wealthier schools with the bigger endowments, of course, than a system which gives some diversity consideration for race/ethnicity absent any consideration of parental wealth/occupation.

You are expecting a Supreme Court decision a bit ahead of game, no ? And the "trickle down to Private schools would not be the lightening bolt that Brown vs BoE was. Lot's of "ifs" in your proposition , so many I don't think its a valid hypothesis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the final numbers for STA this year: (These are matriculation numbers, graduating class size of 77)

Harvard 6
Yale 5
Dartmouth 4
U Penn 4
Michigan 3
Georgetown 3
Colorado 3
Wake Forest 3
Columbia 2
BU 2
William and Mary 2
Franklin and Marshall 2
Middlebury 2
Northwestern 2
Sewanee 2
GW 2
U of Cal santa barbara 2
UVA 2
1 at Bowdoin,Charleston, Cornell, Princeton, Elon, Hartwick, Kenyon, Macalaster, Purdue, Rhodes, SMU, Stanford, St Olaf, Trinity, Tufts, Tulane, Navy, U of Chicago, Maryland, Ole Miss, St Andrews, Wisconsin, Wash U, Wesleyan

Even the lowest end of this list is strong.

I count 23 ivies - very impressive. Ole Miss is the only one that jumps out at the other end.

Yes, Ole Miss is pretty bottom of the barrel but, so is ELON. Good God, when I was college aged, that school was the last resort of complete druggies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the final numbers for STA this year: (These are matriculation numbers, graduating class size of 77)

Harvard 6
Yale 5
Dartmouth 4
U Penn 4
Michigan 3
Georgetown 3
Colorado 3
Wake Forest 3
Columbia 2
BU 2
William and Mary 2
Franklin and Marshall 2
Middlebury 2
Northwestern 2
Sewanee 2
GW 2
U of Cal santa barbara 2
UVA 2
1 at Bowdoin,Charleston, Cornell, Princeton, Elon, Hartwick, Kenyon, Macalaster, Purdue, Rhodes, SMU, Stanford, St Olaf, Trinity, Tufts, Tulane, Navy, U of Chicago, Maryland, Ole Miss, St Andrews, Wisconsin, Wash U, Wesleyan

Even the lowest end of this list is strong.

I count 23 ivies - very impressive. Ole Miss is the only one that jumps out at the other end.

Yes, Ole Miss is pretty bottom of the barrel but, so is ELON. Good God, when I was college aged, that school was the last resort of complete druggies.

Elton is now ranked #1 or #2 in its category (southern universities). Times change.

[Anonymous]

Elon has nice brochures, I'll give them that. I also know some definitely non-druggie, A-average kids who have been accepted there over the past few years.

Anyone who thinks the college rankings are irrelevant to how kids and colleges behave should read the various threads about how various colleges (Elon, Tufts, Brown, U Chicago) have managed to boost their status over the past few decades. I'm not complaining, I sort of admire their success!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elon has nice brochures, I'll give them that. I also know some definitely non-druggie, A-average kids who have been accepted there over the past few years.

Anyone who thinks the college rankings are irrelevant to how kids and colleges behave should read the various threads about how various colleges (Elon, Tufts, Brown, U Chicago) have managed to boost their status over the past few decades. I'm not complaining, I sort of admire their success!

I assume that you are addressing undergraduate programs. University of Chicago has been a top 5 law and MBA degree for as long as I can remember.