Big 3 College Placement 2018-19 Cycle

[Anonymous]

I have two graduates of a Big 3 school. A went to a top five university. B went to a middle-of-the-pack state school. Both received a great HS education which we are lucky to be able to afford. A is academically much stronger than B but both worked hard.

In the end, if I had to send only one of the two to private HS, it would have been B. B was transformed by the experience— gained great study habits and found his passion for biology. A would have been fine at our local public — not sure that the $160k was worth it. Our youngest kid is at public and loving it.

This is a long-winded way of saying that college placement is not the only measure of a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a long-winded way of saying that college placement is not the only measure of a school.

Totally. I'm not going to pretend like college admissions is irrelevant when all is said and done. But what's equally and/or more important to us (whether our kids go public or private for HS) are (1) whether they become intellectually curious or passionate about any particular subject(s); (2) whether they're sufficiently well-prepared to excel academically in undergrad; (3) whether they'll contribute to the campus community at said undergrad, through athletics or other extracurricular activities; (4) whether they've made a strong group of friends (where for some, the loyalty/bond will hopefully be life-long); and (5) whether they're emotionally mature and well-adjusted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.


Actually I am a parent and do not know the details. As far as I know, school does not release information even to current parents.

Actually I am a parent and do not know the details. As far as I know, school does not release information even to current parents.

It's in the STA bulletin that comes out every summer and is mailed to every family. If you ask the college office, they can give it to you as well.

Does Sidwell release the college information? I was a new parent this year and haven't seen anything.

NCS, St. Albans and GDS are quite transparent. But Sidwell is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Wow! Your a$$ can speak so loudly! If you are so f'ing sure only a small handful seemed remotely qualified, did you follow up on all those you interviewed and your alma mater admitted into freshman year? How did they do in their studies? Either the adcoms of your alma mater are f'ing fools or you are and my wager is on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Wow! Your a$$ can speak so loudly! If you are so f'ing sure only a small handful seemed remotely qualified, did you follow up on all those you interviewed and your alma mater admitted into freshman year? How did they do in their studies? Either the adcoms of your alma mater are f'ing fools or you are and my wager is on you.

Since the school actually lets us know on April 1 whether the applicants we interviewed were offered admission, I already know for a fact that over all these years, only one was admitted, and he ended up choosing another very good school. So there is literally no one for me to "follow up on," thankyouverymuch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Wow! Your a$$ can speak so loudly! If you are so f'ing sure only a small handful seemed remotely qualified, did you follow up on all those you interviewed and your alma mater admitted into freshman year? How did they do in their studies? Either the adcoms of your alma mater are f'ing fools or you are and my wager is on you.

Since the school actually lets us know on April 1 whether the applicants we interviewed were offered admission, I already know for a fact that over all these years, only one was admitted, and he ended up choosing another very good school. So there is literally no one for me to "follow up on," thankyouverymuch.

That percentage of accepted students sounds about right given the overall low % of students who get in. After all, it isn't like you personally interviewed every applicant, public or private, in the region.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Wow! Your a$$ can speak so loudly! If you are so f'ing sure only a small handful seemed remotely qualified, did you follow up on all those you interviewed and your alma mater admitted into freshman year? How did they do in their studies? Either the adcoms of your alma mater are f'ing fools or you are and my wager is on you.

In 2018, 234 students at BCC, Blair, RM, Wootton, Whitman, WJ and Churchill applied to Brown. 223 to Columbia. 420 to Cornell. 132 to Dartmouth. 241 to Harvard. 262 to Princeton. 392 to Penn. 250 to Yale. This is in the area of 30-50 kids per school. Doesn't seem to me that this is private school thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Are you joking?

I went to Sidwell and an Ivy. I used to interview for the latter and was only assigned kids from public school (due to where I live). I met a public school kid who had started a nonprofit in rural China at 14, one who had suffered traumatic brain injury from Olympic-level ice hockey (female) and built herself back up, and one who had completed a full college-level math curriculum at Georgetown. None were admitted (which is why I don't interview anymore - what's the point?)

Every kid I interviewed was MORE than qualified - certainly as much if not more so than my college friends and I.

You're delusional.

[Anonymous]

No one I interviewed (apart from two or three applicants, one of them being the admit I mentioned above) accomplished anything close to what you just described. Were most of them good students? Of course. But were they at the top of their classes academically with pointy extracurricular achievements? Almost none of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bee fing is going to be an issue at any of the top 15-20 schools in the area, not just the Big 3. Don't assume that the pressure cooker environment of a Sidwell causes teenage mischief. It just happens at that age. Kids will be kids.

Welcome back. You were missed! I've noticed a few "beefer-like" posts over the last week. Is school out?

The Beefer and the Vaper are clearly the same author...

Welcome back. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL, you think this is somehow unique to the Big 3?

Parents of PUBLIC SCHOOLS have their kids applying to the Ivies in droves too. I've interviewed several each year for the past decade and only a small handful over this time seemed remotely qualified IMO. I don't see you calling public school parents "prestige whores" though.

Wow! Your a$$ can speak so loudly! If you are so f'ing sure only a small handful seemed remotely qualified, did you follow up on all those you interviewed and your alma mater admitted into freshman year? How did they do in their studies? Either the adcoms of your alma mater are f'ing fools or you are and my wager is on you.

Since the school actually lets us know on April 1 whether the applicants we interviewed were offered admission, I already know for a fact that over all these years, only one was admitted, and he ended up choosing another very good school. So there is literally no one for me to "follow up on," thankyouverymuch.

The school has been selecting who you would interview for the past over a decade. Since the school knows your academic performance while your were a student, I suggest the school was sending your way only applicants matching your own level of intelligence.

[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.

It’s not a mystery why Princeton retains its status. Princeton alums are crazy loyal, and it per alum it has a larger endowment than Harvard or Yale.

It has strong departments across the board, in part because it’s only professional school is small, a deliberate choice by the school.

It also isn’t nut job liberal, just liberal. Harvard and its dean have really lost their way, wish they’d rewrite their mission statement already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a mystery why Princeton retains its status. Princeton alums are crazy loyal, and it per alum it has a larger endowment than Harvard or Yale.

It has strong departments across the board, in part because it’s only professional school is small, a deliberate choice by the school.

It also isn’t nut job liberal, just liberal. Harvard and its dean have really lost their way, wish they’d rewrite their mission statement already.

Agreed. We’ve been remarkably lucky in our leaders - Tilghman was an exceptional leader, and Eisgruber is strong, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The school has been selecting who you would interview for the past over a decade. Since the school knows your academic performance while your were a student, I suggest the school was sending your way only applicants matching your own level of intelligence.

Swing and a miss. Alumni volunteers do the interview matching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school has been selecting who you would interview for the past over a decade. Since the school knows your academic performance while your were a student, I suggest the school was sending your way only applicants matching your own level of intelligence.

Swing and a miss. Alumni volunteers do the interview matching.

And you didn't volunteer to do interview matching. You accepted the list given to you.