NCS college admissions if kid is not a legacy, URM, or athletic recruit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly looking through the Instagram, I was floored. 6 out of the 8 Ivies (AND Stanford). Lots of solid LACs like Pomona, Middlebury and Davidson. People on this board are something else.

Me too. Is is a very impressive list. The op is very bitter and it is sad.

This list is so-so. Not that distinctive from other posted results in this area. Infact, not very distinctive at all. Several of the public and a few private schools had more distinctive lists this year.

And yet NCS grads tend do be quite successful in life. I know many and they are all doing quite well and are living happy well-balanced lives. You on the other hand sound quite miserable. How unfortunate for you that you just don’t get it. The key to success is not getting imo an Ivy. Just ask all of the Ivy grads you know. I think they would agree. Many of them don’t get placed for jobs or internships after college just like everywhere else. Many do but trust me they have their own issues with life after college too.

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?

Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

Okay, you are super sensitive. I’m the pp that you or someone called an idiot. There is something wrong here. No one can share thoughts on NCS else be called out about it. Like another poster said, colleges are growing more competitive. Around here, many schools had good years. That’s not to say that NCS is not a good school. There are lots of good schools here in the DMV. Other students have become as competitive as NCS students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

I agree that people shouldn’t be making fun of teenagers, or for that matter, younger kids. Plenty of threads on this board are just about that, sadly. So welcome to the aggrieved club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

I agree that people shouldn’t be making fun of teenagers, or for that matter, younger kids. Plenty of threads on this board are just about that, sadly. So welcome to the aggrieved club.

OP and the posters defending her (though I believe it's one and the same) should be ashamed. She comes back on here trying to say she said nothing negative, and I have had to remind her and her defenders several times about just how derogatory her original post was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

I agree that people shouldn’t be making fun of teenagers, or for that matter, younger kids. Plenty of threads on this board are just about that, sadly. So welcome to the aggrieved club.

OP and the posters defending her (though I believe it's one and the same) should be ashamed. She comes back on here trying to say she said nothing negative, and I have had to remind her and her defenders several times about just how derogatory her original post was.

I'm not arguing that. But go to any of the other epic threads re. Maret, GDS, Sidewell, Potomac, STA, NCS, Madeira, Holton, GP, SR, etc., etc., and you have the some sort of the commentary about something that casts as school, its families, its students in a derogatory light, for whatever reason(s). Or anything about Covid and masking. Again, as much as you may be infuriated by the implication of the original post, it's nothing unusual for this forum. The the NCS grads fight that by their accomplishments in college and beyond.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I have not posted in this thread since 5/15. You are welcome to verify that with Jeff.
There are multiple people posting as me or assumed (by others) to be me. It's funny how people assume that a OP will post and then stick around and converse for days and days. I'd bet that many people post and then never return.
It's also striking how many different directions this post went since I posted. It hit most of the emotionally-charged college topics.

[Anonymous]

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?


Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

STA is also hard. I believe the real answer is that the dynamics at an all girls’ school are just more difficult - not just at NCS, but many other girls’ schools. I have daughters who have attended various local girls’ schools, and they have tended to be be more “cliquey” with more conflict and competition. STA has built a culture where most of the boys are driven to do their best, but they support each other and don’t wish for their classmates to do poorly. There are different groups, of course, but they seem to get along with each other. I have always thought the rotating family lunch tables has a lot to do with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

I agree that people shouldn’t be making fun of teenagers, or for that matter, younger kids. Plenty of threads on this board are just about that, sadly. So welcome to the aggrieved club.

OP and the posters defending her (though I believe it's one and the same) should be ashamed. She comes back on here trying to say she said nothing negative, and I have had to remind her and her defenders several times about just how derogatory her original post was.

I'm not arguing that. But go to any of the other epic threads re. Maret, GDS, Sidewell, Potomac, STA, NCS, Madeira, Holton, GP, SR, etc., etc., and you have the some sort of the commentary about something that casts as school, its families, its students in a derogatory light, for whatever reason(s). Or anything about Covid and masking. Again, as much as you may be infuriated by the implication of the original post, it's nothing unusual for this forum. The the NCS grads fight that by their accomplishments in college and beyond.

Just because bad behavior is ubiquitous doesn't mean we should let it slide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I have not posted in this thread since 5/15. You are welcome to verify that with Jeff.
There are multiple people posting as me or assumed (by others) to be me. It's funny how people assume that a OP will post and then stick around and converse for days and days. I'd bet that many people post and then never return.
It's also striking how many different directions this post went since I posted. It hit most of the emotionally-charged college topics.

Please go look at the Insta again, and look at the faces of the girls in your school community that you chose to anonymously and wrongfully insult. Did they deserve that from you? Is this how you want people to treat your daughter? I think we should expect better from each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes and there are a few other great schools that a few girls have not listed. Some Ivy’s.
Who can blame them, it seems not matter what these girls achieve it is somehow not good enough.
No wonder these kids are stressed. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for OP’s daughter at this point.

For the love, this thread was not knocking the college admissions of NCS kids but rather trying to determine if any of the highly ranked colleges admitted girls solely based on academic achievement — or rather if you also needed to be athletic recruit, URM or legacy. I think it was determined that most girls did indeed have the other factor.

There was also another question about whether academic girls (without hooks) were getting into other schools that are highly regarded (I think there was a list somewhere) such as Notre Dame or Northwestern… this devolved into a thread about the terror and inaccuracy of the ranking system and the moral bankruptcy and idiocy of anyone who cares or relies on such rankings. We never got an answer as best as I could tell.

OP, please read what you wrote in your original post. Here's a snippet: I'm getting freaked out by the schools that girls outside of the above categories are attending.

It was a mean and derogatory post about the colleges that many of your child's schoolmates are attending, that simply aren't good enough for your child. You mentioned how hard she works, to clearly imply that the girls with "hooks" don't have to to work as hard. You started it. You cannot come on here claiming a different intent. Your daughter has to work hard to get good grades and doesn't have the interest or stamina to do that and play sports. Fine, but don't criticize the girls who can do both.

I am not OP but rather a poster who has a similar profile kid, hence my interest in this thread. FWIW, I didn’t take the original thread the way others did. I thought “the tell it to me straight” and “freaked out” was an attempt at disarming humor. I think one inferred different tones, depending on the profile of your kid.

There is nothing at all humorous in joking that you are freaking out about the schools most girls are attending. They are real people, and they are attending great schools. It is not funny; it's a rude attempt at humor at the expense of teenagers.

I agree that people shouldn’t be making fun of teenagers, or for that matter, younger kids. Plenty of threads on this board are just about that, sadly. So welcome to the aggrieved club.

OP and the posters defending her (though I believe it's one and the same) should be ashamed. She comes back on here trying to say she said nothing negative, and I have had to remind her and her defenders several times about just how derogatory her original post was.

I'm not arguing that. But go to any of the other epic threads re. Maret, GDS, Sidewell, Potomac, STA, NCS, Madeira, Holton, GP, SR, etc., etc., and you have the some sort of the commentary about something that casts as school, its families, its students in a derogatory light, for whatever reason(s). Or anything about Covid and masking. Again, as much as you may be infuriated by the implication of the original post, it's nothing unusual for this forum. The the NCS grads fight that by their accomplishments in college and beyond.

Just because bad behavior is ubiquitous doesn't mean we should let it slide.

If you believe that, then please go after all the posters belittling non-athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?


Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

STA is also hard. I believe the real answer is that the dynamics at an all girls’ school are just more difficult - not just at NCS, but many other girls’ schools. I have daughters who have attended various local girls’ schools, and they have tended to be be more “cliquey” with more conflict and competition. STA has built a culture where most of the boys are driven to do their best, but they support each other and don’t wish for their classmates to do poorly. There are different groups, of course, but they seem to get along with each other. I have always thought the rotating family lunch tables has a lot to do with this.

I have high schoolers at both schools. Both are challenging. NCS is unnecessarily more difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?


Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

STA is also hard. I believe the real answer is that the dynamics at an all girls’ school are just more difficult - not just at NCS, but many other girls’ schools. I have daughters who have attended various local girls’ schools, and they have tended to be be more “cliquey” with more conflict and competition. STA has built a culture where most of the boys are driven to do their best, but they support each other and don’t wish for their classmates to do poorly. There are different groups, of course, but they seem to get along with each other. I have always thought the rotating family lunch tables has a lot to do with this.

I have high schoolers at both schools. Both are challenging. NCS is unnecessarily more difficult.

NCS is much harder than STA. I have high schoolers at both.
At STA boys who work hard do well. There is a direct correlation between doing the work and doing well.
At NCS girls can do the work and study hard but then it's still a crapshoot whether or not she'll meet the standard because the standard is never given. Or teachers just don't give As (at all). It's just unnecessarily brutal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?


Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

STA is also hard. I believe the real answer is that the dynamics at an all girls’ school are just more difficult - not just at NCS, but many other girls’ schools. I have daughters who have attended various local girls’ schools, and they have tended to be be more “cliquey” with more conflict and competition. STA has built a culture where most of the boys are driven to do their best, but they support each other and don’t wish for their classmates to do poorly. There are different groups, of course, but they seem to get along with each other. I have always thought the rotating family lunch tables has a lot to do with this.

I have high schoolers at both schools. Both are challenging. NCS is unnecessarily more difficult.

NCS is much harder than STA. I have high schoolers at both.
At STA boys who work hard do well. There is a direct correlation between doing the work and doing well.
At NCS girls can do the work and study hard but then it's still a crapshoot whether or not she'll meet the standard because the standard is never given. Or teachers just don't give As (at all). It's just unnecessarily brutal.

Then why do you stay? That's what I not understanding. Did NCS just get harder over the past few years or has it always been this way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’ve been struck by the fact that of the several NCS grads I know, very few want to send their own daughter to NCS.
This is different from the St. Albans grads I know who by and large do want their boys to go to St. Albans. Why such a difference?


Because NCS is HARD!!!
It is not for everyone

STA is also hard. I believe the real answer is that the dynamics at an all girls’ school are just more difficult - not just at NCS, but many other girls’ schools. I have daughters who have attended various local girls’ schools, and they have tended to be be more “cliquey” with more conflict and competition. STA has built a culture where most of the boys are driven to do their best, but they support each other and don’t wish for their classmates to do poorly. There are different groups, of course, but they seem to get along with each other. I have always thought the rotating family lunch tables has a lot to do with this.

I have high schoolers at both schools. Both are challenging. NCS is unnecessarily more difficult.

NCS is much harder than STA. I have high schoolers at both.
At STA boys who work hard do well. There is a direct correlation between doing the work and doing well.
At NCS girls can do the work and study hard but then it's still a crapshoot whether or not she'll meet the standard because the standard is never given. Or teachers just don't give As (at all). It's just unnecessarily brutal.

Then why do you stay? That's what I not understanding. Did NCS just get harder over the past few years or has it always been this way?

because
1)my daughter is mid high school. She has friends and is invested in the school. It's really hard to pull a kid mid high school. She likes many things about the school.
2)let's say that a kid does pull out mid high school for public. Her final transcript will have the NCS grade blemishes--but now without the NCS diploma. So they have a public school diploma with B's. Which is kind of the worse of all worlds.