Big 3 College Placement 2018-19 Cycle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Merit includes achievements in athletics and other extra-curriculars. It's myopic to suggest otherwise.

"we disagree"

- the rest of the world

+100. And the US have been losing and will continue to lose to the India's, China's and Korea's of this world because they think merit includes achievements in athletics and ECs. Look at the top companies of the world and see the national/racial composition of their CEOs/CFOs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Merit includes achievements in athletics and other extra-curriculars. It's myopic to suggest otherwise.

"we disagree"

- the rest of the world

The U.S. universities don't care that you disagree. So what if the U.S. is different; we always have been. If that means your kids can't get into the U.S. school they hoped for, go to one of the "pure merit" schools you are bragging about. And if you think U.S. universities are so bad, why do you care what their admissions policies are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmmm...sounds like lots of posts from entitled and dull rich white kids kvetching about admissions, rather than working hard and and being talented and sharp like their indian and chinese friends

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the posters you mocked are actually non-white.....

In fact, it's racist to assume they are white. The message is that POC don't care about college admissions?

Went right to the racist card? Weak. Indian and Chinese, not POC, is what was mentioned. Long and observant look at indian and chinese communities vs high achieving whites shows that the I and C communities work harder because their families a generally insecure and have a sort of chip on their shoulder. The top 10 shcools would be 50% asian if admissions were left to proper metrics, rather than diversity legacy sports initiatives. Oh the thought of ivy campuses with 50% asians would be SHOCKING to entitled elites who slither their way into admission without demonstrating equal academic achievement to their asian friends. Try not to melt with the so called racist overtones of this post. Just let the thoughts sink in as you bask in your privilege.

Also, good advise to all you youngsters: despite current trends many of you who are money motivated will not achieve your financial potential in engineering. There are way too many exceptional foreign engineers who come here from schools like IIT in india. BTW, IIT grads are the brainiest people in the world; they make MIT people look SOFT. Medical, law, finance, and even dental are far easier way to make the kind of money that is commiserate to your abilities, without the continuous failures (and pesky competition) that will ultimately happen if you go toe to toe with IIT type peoples. Best of luck, ya'll.

IIT grads are no doubt smart, but I will not go as far as saying they are "the brainiest people in the world". There are many very smart Chinese and South Korean grads as well.

IIT is a university system in India. China and South Korea are countries. IIT might have become the most important university in the world. It has a low endowment but the most impactful grads. CEOs, professors, computer scientists, senators, all know this. Ask someone who is "high up" ; they'll tell you how the world works. HA!

Ha Ha! You are telling an IITian what IIT is? Not only in school, both in India and in the U.S., but also at work in different professions, I worked alongside other IITians, graduates from China and South Korea among others. I have developed a healthy respect for the knowledge and skills of South Koreans and Chinese.

[Anonymous]

Sidwell class of 2019 matriculations (111 of 127 students accounted for):

Harvard/Yale/Princeton/Stanford - 10
Lesser Ivies - 18
MIT - 0

Chicago - 5
Duke - 3
Michigan - 3
Northwestern - 4
Wash U. - 3
Carnegie Mellon - 1
Tufts - 2

Top SLAC - Amherst, Colby, Middlebury, Swarthmore, Haverford, Wellesley, Wesleyan - 15

Plus plenty of other good schools like Colgate, Rice, NYU, Georgtown, Grinnell, Emory, Air Force, USC, Vassar, Wake Forest, UNC, UVA, Washington & Lee, William & Mary, Wisconsin, Notre Dame

I'm sure there are a number of legacies and other hooks, but seems pretty impressive to me.

[Anonymous]

I hear Sidwell kids are learning charm. Must have helped those cats get into those spring chicken coups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell class of 2019 matriculations (111 of 127 students accounted for):

Harvard/Yale/Princeton/Stanford - 10
Lesser Ivies - 18
MIT - 0

Chicago - 5
Duke - 3
Michigan - 3
Northwestern - 4
Wash U. - 3
Carnegie Mellon - 1
Tufts - 2

Top SLAC - Amherst, Colby, Middlebury, Swarthmore, Haverford, Wellesley, Wesleyan - 15

Plus plenty of other good schools like Colgate, Rice, NYU, Georgtown, Grinnell, Emory, Air Force, USC, Vassar, Wake Forest, UNC, UVA, Washington & Lee, William & Mary, Wisconsin, Notre Dame

I'm sure there are a number of legacies and other hooks, but seems pretty impressive to me.

Congratulations!

[Anonymous]

How did you compile this list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell class of 2019 matriculations (111 of 127 students accounted for):

Harvard/Yale/Princeton/Stanford - 10
Lesser Ivies - 18
MIT - 0

Chicago - 5
Duke - 3
Michigan - 3
Northwestern - 4
Wash U. - 3
Carnegie Mellon - 1
Tufts - 2

Top SLAC - Amherst, Colby, Middlebury, Swarthmore, Haverford, Wellesley, Wesleyan - 15

Plus plenty of other good schools like Colgate, Rice, NYU, Georgtown, Grinnell, Emory, Air Force, USC, Vassar, Wake Forest, UNC, UVA, Washington & Lee, William & Mary, Wisconsin, Notre Dame

I'm sure there are a number of legacies and other hooks, but seems pretty impressive to me.

No MIT. It means something...

[Anonymous]

Only about 20 percent to Ivys and Stanford. Not great, especially considering legacies.

[Anonymous]

Big 3s have no MIT, CAL TECH, by none-hooked students for years. They are weak in STEM compared with Fairfax good public high schools. They chewn out a huge percentage of lawyers, because a large percentage of the students are from lawyer families. The lawyer parents are weak in STEM to start with. Since been weak in STEM and still making $$$$$ why bother invest in STEM ? With these people in board, how could the schools incest in STEM? If the schools do, the boards will not support since their own DD, DD won't benefit from that investment much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Big 3s have no MIT, CAL TECH, by none-hooked students for years. They are weak in STEM compared with Fairfax good public high schools. They chewn out a huge percentage of lawyers, because a large percentage of the students are from lawyer families. The lawyer parents are weak in STEM to start with. Since been weak in STEM and still making $$$$$ why bother invest in STEM ? With these people in board, how could the schools incest in STEM? If the schools do, the boards will not support since their own DD, DD won't benefit from that investment much.

???????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only about 20 percent to Ivys and Stanford. Not great, especially considering legacies.

It’s actually 14% if the figures are accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only about 20 percent to Ivys and Stanford. Not great, especially considering legacies.

It’s actually 14% if the figures are accurate.

28/127 = 22 percent (this includes all Ivy schools) .

[Anonymous]

This Sidwell list is fake... The tip off was “lesser Ivies“

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: This Sidwell list is fake... The tip off was “lesser Ivies“

+1

Know this for a fact.