Big 3 College Placement 2018-19 Cycle

[Anonymous]

STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any brave Big 3 parent to share this year's matriculation list of schools?

It's not about being "brave." These schools don't release yearly matriculation lists so there's nothing to share.

GDS is pretty transparent about this information.

If you call the below information transparent, the word certainly has a new meaning! Nobody can dispute that.

https://www.gds.org/academics/college-counseling/matriculation-map

GDS College Matriculation, 2015–2018

They publish annual matriculation stats in their alumni magazine.

https://issuu.com/jasonstpeter/docs/gds-fallmagazine18-issuupages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always saw the top cohort referenced as HYPSM (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT)

+1. Since when were Stanford and MIT considered as less prestigious? Never.

Since the rise of tech I actually think Harvard, MIT and Stanford have become the top 3 for the most ambitious kids. Harvard was fortunate because Zuckerberg started Facebook and pulled a lot of Harvard alums in with him. Yale may be the shakiest because they have the weakest CS/tech but they have recently poured resources in to fix it and of course they have such a dominant law school. Princeton mysteriously seems to maintain its status no matter how the winds blow so kudos to them for that.

Harvard is graduating career protestors bent on living off donor funds. Soft majors, soft careers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always saw the top cohort referenced as HYPSM (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT)

+1. Since when were Stanford and MIT considered as less prestigious? Never.

Since the rise of tech I actually think Harvard, MIT and Stanford have become the top 3 for the most ambitious kids. Harvard was fortunate because Zuckerberg started Facebook and pulled a lot of Harvard alums in with him. Yale may be the shakiest because they have the weakest CS/tech but they have recently poured resources in to fix it and of course they have such a dominant law school. Princeton mysteriously seems to maintain its status no matter how the winds blow so kudos to them for that.

Harvard is graduating career protestors bent on living off donor funds. Soft majors, soft careers.

Yeah, ok. You’d still sell your mother if it meant your kid had a 5% better chance of getting in. This is the gripe of the rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anyone is in denial. Most of the posters say it helps. It’s a question of whether you can draw any general conclusions about the legacy pool or claim that you must be hooked to be admitted.

Exactly. It's the folks dismissing certain admit as merely "legacies" who are, without any evidence, implying that these students were somehow less qualified or deserving on the merits. When in fact the opposite is generally true.

Schools would be a lot less white if they didn't take legacy status into account. Just look at schools where legacies matter (Harvard) and ones where they don't matter (MIT).

Jesus. These schools already boast that they’re at 50 percent “people of color”? What do you want? Eighty percent?! Let’s get rid of racial preferences and admit based on merit. Period.

If they did that schools would be 80% people of color. They’d all be Asian and white people would still complain and try to find a new way to rig the system. Face it, all white people want is a system where their less qualified kid gets in. You throw around the word merit but that’s not what you want.

I disagree that they would all be Asian. They are building well rounded and diverse classes. Diversity is more than race or religion. They are trying to build a well rounded class full of exceptional students, scholar-athletes, geographical differences, personality differences.

Oh - so not merit after all. You want to scream merit because you think it will mean more white people, but then when it becomes apparent that it doesn't, then we start in with 'personality'. I see - when you say a well rounded and diverse class, you mean Germans and Italians.

You want to see what true merit admissions looks like? Stuyvesant High School in NYC uses a single test to determine admissions. It's 75% Asian/18% white.

White students make up only 15% of the NYC public school population. The rich/smart white kids go to private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

The admissions results for GDS were amazing this year. Congrats to all!!

[Anonymous]

What negative inferences should be drawn over the fact that Sidwell won’t release its college list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

Why not. It shows the hard work of the boys and the school. Celebrate achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

Why not. It shows the hard work of the boys and the school. Celebrate achievement.

STA and all other Big 3 should absolutely disclose their college matriculations each and every year, not just on a good year or a vague summary of 5 years. Anyone who entrusts their child to an institution and pays them hundreds of thousands of dollars should expect an honest straight forward understanding of end results. That would be a given in the business world. So why are the Big 3 afraid to do so? Because they realize it will push back the curtain and many may not be so impressed with all the results each year.

These schools are filled with top students, they have their pick of the litter, so to speak. Then these top/pick of the litter students all have to compete against each other for grades which creates a hierarchy or bell curve. The tippy top students may get into the Ivies, Stanford, MITs, but the rest/majority do not. So parents send their top students to top schools, pay big bucks, and assume they will get into top colleges, but this is not always the case. These top kids often feel average because they are competing against all top students. They end up at good above average or average colleges that they could have gotten into from any school. That being said, these kids do get a good education (although similar to many other schools in our area, especially the Big 5 or even 10). The Big 3 schools should not be afraid, let their reputation stand on its own, and pull back the curtain to show their matriculations every year. Allow parents who are investing in their schools make informed decisions. Maybe Ivies, Stanford, MIT is not important and that is ok. Maybe everyone is happy with the end result of an average or above average college and that is fine as well. But at least let everyone know the reality of college acceptances by disclosing the real matriculation results each year and not hide behind a vague list of schools for the past five years. If they have nothing to hide, they should be honest. As a parent giving the school my child and over $500,000 I would expect no less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always saw the top cohort referenced as HYPSM (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT)

+1. Since when were Stanford and MIT considered as less prestigious? Never.

Family friend's kid took Harvard's gap year option over heading to MIT. MIT isn't dancing with HYPS.

[Anonymous]

People look at the list of past five year matriculations and focus on the top schools. What if you noticed that STA students in the past five years matriculated to Auburn University, College of Charleston, Elon, Hillsdale College, Indiana University, Saint Mary's College of Maryland, Mount Sant Mary's University, Montgomery College, Catholic University of America, GW University, Miami University of Ohio, Wofford College, etc. Nothing wrong with these schools, but high acceptance rates and nothing special. Not sure those results would be worth my child going to a pressure cooker school and my half a million in tuition dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

Why not. It shows the hard work of the boys and the school. Celebrate achievement.

STA and all other Big 3 should absolutely disclose their college matriculations each and every year, not just on a good year or a vague summary of 5 years. Anyone who entrusts their child to an institution and pays them hundreds of thousands of dollars should expect an honest straight forward understanding of end results. That would be a given in the business world. So why are the Big 3 afraid to do so? Because they realize it will push back the curtain and many may not be so impressed with all the results each year.

These schools are filled with top students, they have their pick of the litter, so to speak. Then these top/pick of the litter students all have to compete against each other for grades which creates a hierarchy or bell curve. The tippy top students may get into the Ivies, Stanford, MITs, but the rest/majority do not. So parents send their top students to top schools, pay big bucks, and assume they will get into top colleges, but this is not always the case. These top kids often feel average because they are competing against all top students. They end up at good above average or average colleges that they could have gotten into from any school. That being said, these kids do get a good education (although similar to many other schools in our area, especially the Big 5 or even 10). The Big 3 schools should not be afraid, let their reputation stand on its own, and pull back the curtain to show their matriculations every year. Allow parents who are investing in their schools make informed decisions. Maybe Ivies, Stanford, MIT is not important and that is ok. Maybe everyone is happy with the end result of an average or above average college and that is fine as well. But at least let everyone know the reality of college acceptances by disclosing the real matriculation results each year and not hide behind a vague list of schools for the past five years. If they have nothing to hide, they should be honest. As a parent giving the school my child and over $500,000 I would expect no less.

You are one persistent little troll, aren't you?

To answer the previous poster - trolls like this are why you keep this information out of the public. Parents know. Prospective parents know. People like this - they don't need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

Why not. It shows the hard work of the boys and the school. Celebrate achievement.

STA and all other Big 3 should absolutely disclose their college matriculations each and every year, not just on a good year or a vague summary of 5 years. Anyone who entrusts their child to an institution and pays them hundreds of thousands of dollars should expect an honest straight forward understanding of end results. That would be a given in the business world. So why are the Big 3 afraid to do so? Because they realize it will push back the curtain and many may not be so impressed with all the results each year.

These schools are filled with top students, they have their pick of the litter, so to speak. Then these top/pick of the litter students all have to compete against each other for grades which creates a hierarchy or bell curve. The tippy top students may get into the Ivies, Stanford, MITs, but the rest/majority do not. So parents send their top students to top schools, pay big bucks, and assume they will get into top colleges, but this is not always the case. These top kids often feel average because they are competing against all top students. They end up at good above average or average colleges that they could have gotten into from any school. That being said, these kids do get a good education (although similar to many other schools in our area, especially the Big 5 or even 10). The Big 3 schools should not be afraid, let their reputation stand on its own, and pull back the curtain to show their matriculations every year. Allow parents who are investing in their schools make informed decisions. Maybe Ivies, Stanford, MIT is not important and that is ok. Maybe everyone is happy with the end result of an average or above average college and that is fine as well. But at least let everyone know the reality of college acceptances by disclosing the real matriculation results each year and not hide behind a vague list of schools for the past five years. If they have nothing to hide, they should be honest. As a parent giving the school my child and over $500,000 I would expect no less.

You are so naive. You would understand why not to disclose if you position yourself as the principal. There are enough big 3 haters there waiting for any opportunity to bash the school. Any news about Sidwell will easily grow over 10 pages. Do you think the school wants to stimulate these haters as well as some jealous people every year by disclosing it matriculation. Moreover, if you are a parent of big 3, you certainly hear some information about the matriculation every year though not in details.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA did really well in 2019. I think nearly 10 percent of the class to ONE of HYP. A couple of other great schools got 7-10 kids. I hope it is fully disclosed.

Why do you hope it is fully disclosed. As long as you know why do you care what a bunch of strangers think?

Why not. It shows the hard work of the boys and the school. Celebrate achievement.

STA and all other Big 3 should absolutely disclose their college matriculations each and every year, not just on a good year or a vague summary of 5 years. Anyone who entrusts their child to an institution and pays them hundreds of thousands of dollars should expect an honest straight forward understanding of end results. That would be a given in the business world. So why are the Big 3 afraid to do so? Because they realize it will push back the curtain and many may not be so impressed with all the results each year.

These schools are filled with top students, they have their pick of the litter, so to speak. Then these top/pick of the litter students all have to compete against each other for grades which creates a hierarchy or bell curve. The tippy top students may get into the Ivies, Stanford, MITs, but the rest/majority do not. So parents send their top students to top schools, pay big bucks, and assume they will get into top colleges, but this is not always the case. These top kids often feel average because they are competing against all top students. They end up at good above average or average colleges that they could have gotten into from any school. That being said, these kids do get a good education (although similar to many other schools in our area, especially the Big 5 or even 10). The Big 3 schools should not be afraid, let their reputation stand on its own, and pull back the curtain to show their matriculations every year. Allow parents who are investing in their schools make informed decisions. Maybe Ivies, Stanford, MIT is not important and that is ok. Maybe everyone is happy with the end result of an average or above average college and that is fine as well. But at least let everyone know the reality of college acceptances by disclosing the real matriculation results each year and not hide behind a vague list of schools for the past five years. If they have nothing to hide, they should be honest. As a parent giving the school my child and over $500,000 I would expect no less.

You are so naive. You would understand why not to disclose if you position yourself as the principal. There are enough big 3 haters there waiting for any opportunity to bash the school. Any news about Sidwell will easily grow over 10 pages. Do you think the school wants to stimulate these haters as well as some jealous people every year by disclosing it matriculation. Moreover, if you are a parent of big 3, you certainly hear some information about the matriculation every year though not in details.

Again, if you are a parent or prospective parent- you know the details. It's published every year. The general public, this board and certainly not this poster has any reason to know. Which is why no one should post this information.