Stupid question about elite private high schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Your socio-economic status is way more important to life success vs. public/private. That said, the kids with the highest ROI from a top 10 school are the poor/usually first gen kids who mostly come from public schools.

Also, the top STEM programs are heavily weighted towards public schools...70% of MIT went to public school (often magnet schools). Go look at the Forbes 30-under-30 company founders, and most went to public high school. Again, the common theme is nearly all come from UMC or wealthy backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Your socio-economic status is way more important to life success vs. public/private. That said, the kids with the highest ROI from a top 10 school are the poor/usually first gen kids who mostly come from public schools.

Also, the top STEM programs are heavily weighted towards public schools...70% of MIT went to public school (often magnet schools). Go look at the Forbes 30-under-30 company founders, and most went to public high school. Again, the common theme is nearly all come from UMC or wealthy backgrounds.

You do realize that even at 30 percent, private school kids are overrepresented at MIT. Only around 10 percent of kids attend private school.

[Anonymous]

Kids from suburban affluent public schools are the kids really getting squeezed in college admissions. Selective colleges prefer magnet schools and privates on the higher income end, and urban and rural on the lower income end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Your socio-economic status is way more important to life success vs. public/private. That said, the kids with the highest ROI from a top 10 school are the poor/usually first gen kids who mostly come from public schools.

Also, the top STEM programs are heavily weighted towards public schools...70% of MIT went to public school (often magnet schools). Go look at the Forbes 30-under-30 company founders, and most went to public high school. Again, the common theme is nearly all come from UMC or wealthy backgrounds.

You do realize that even at 30 percent, private school kids are overrepresented at MIT. Only around 10 percent of kids attend private school.

It’s 20% private and 10% international.

Sure, that’s over-represented, and nobody is saying private school kids don’t do well in life…but to claim that UMC public school kids will struggle is kind of silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Your socio-economic status is way more important to life success vs. public/private. That said, the kids with the highest ROI from a top 10 school are the poor/usually first gen kids who mostly come from public schools.

Also, the top STEM programs are heavily weighted towards public schools...70% of MIT went to public school (often magnet schools). Go look at the Forbes 30-under-30 company founders, and most went to public high school. Again, the common theme is nearly all come from UMC or wealthy backgrounds.

You do realize that even at 30 percent, private school kids are overrepresented at MIT. Only around 10 percent of kids attend private school.

DP

Yes and most of those private school kids are legacy going into top universities. That said if your UMC kid went to elite private school and comes from parents who went to any non-elite university those kids are going to a similar university as their UMC parents. Why do you think they ask for your parents’ university on the private school application? The private schools would rather take a non legacy from parents who went Ivy than a non legacy from parents who went to state schools, all else being equal. Private schools also have a disproportionate amount of kids from parents who attended elite universities. I send my kids to an elite private school and I went to my state flagship. I’ve seen this pattern year after year. My kid’s best friends’ parents attended Harvard (x3), Yale (x2), Cambridge, Vanderbilt (not elite), Stanford, McGill. Then there is me summa cum laude at state flagship and my husband from elite foreign university (that doesn’t take legacy).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, because most people who send their kids to private don't think the tuition part is a big deal. It's about the quality of the environment and learning, not a direct funnel to certain colleges.

Are privates around here $35k? Ours is $52k.

Gonzaga is roughly $35k, as it is subsidized by the Catholic Church. All Catholic schools have a lower tuition than surrounding privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Your socio-economic status is way more important to life success vs. public/private. That said, the kids with the highest ROI from a top 10 school are the poor/usually first gen kids who mostly come from public schools.

Also, the top STEM programs are heavily weighted towards public schools...70% of MIT went to public school (often magnet schools). Go look at the Forbes 30-under-30 company founders, and most went to public high school. Again, the common theme is nearly all come from UMC or wealthy backgrounds.

You do realize that even at 30 percent, private school kids are overrepresented at MIT. Only around 10 percent of kids attend private school.

DP

Yes and most of those private school kids are legacy going into top universities. That said if your UMC kid went to elite private school and comes from parents who went to any non-elite university those kids are going to a similar university as their UMC parents. Why do you think they ask for your parents’ university on the private school application? The private schools would rather take a non legacy from parents who went Ivy than a non legacy from parents who went to state schools, all else being equal. Private schools also have a disproportionate amount of kids from parents who attended elite universities. I send my kids to an elite private school and I went to my state flagship. I’ve seen this pattern year after year. My kid’s best friends’ parents attended Harvard (x3), Yale (x2), Cambridge, Vanderbilt (not elite), Stanford, McGill. Then there is me summa cum laude at state flagship and my husband from elite foreign university (that doesn’t take legacy).

Most private school kids are not legacy, at our feeder private , maybe five percent attend same school as one of parents. The level of cope coming from some public school posters through the roof.

[Anonymous]

We live in the Whitman cluster and have heard too many stories about some of the problem kids we don't want our kids around. Our private school is selective, whereas public school has to take everyone. Whether our kids end up at a T2 or T3 school will depend more on their abilities, and I think our private will get them to the best college they could have attended, which will again be more selective than the public high school option here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

Not really. Most non-magnet public school students at top colleges struggle and don’t have good outcomes afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

Not really. Most non-magnet public school students at top colleges struggle and don’t have good outcomes afterwards.

That’s an idiotic statement, with zero factual basis.

Kids who graduate Langley or Whitman or Palo Alto High school or any number of high performing public schools located in wealthy areas do just fine at top colleges and many have great outcomes.

[Anonymous]

We found the great benefit to our private middle school and high school was the extra scaffolding and commitment of the teachers to make sure our imperfect kid did the very best they could in their classes. We hate to think what their outcome would’ve been otherwise. But they got into a very respectable university not a top, but a perfect fit for them) and I wholeheartedly believe it’s because of what the private school environment provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

Not really. Most non-magnet public school students at top colleges struggle and don’t have good outcomes afterwards.

That’s an idiotic statement, with zero factual basis.

Kids who graduate Langley or Whitman or Palo Alto High school or any number of high performing public schools located in wealthy areas do just fine at top colleges and many have great outcomes.

+1. This sounds like a kid commenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

Not really. Most non-magnet public school students at top colleges struggle and don’t have good outcomes afterwards.

That’s an idiotic statement, with zero factual basis.

Kids who graduate Langley or Whitman or Palo Alto High school or any number of high performing public schools located in wealthy areas do just fine at top colleges and many have great outcomes.

Alright, but what about the average public school kid who makes it to a top college? Are they having great outcomes? They are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be upset to have my kids in public school and think I had a good outcome just because my kid landed into a top college. These kids still had to sit through public school for K-12 with the class clowns, checked out teachers, low effort curriculum, and severe behavior kids. These parents have no idea what they missed out on in the better private schools for their kids. College is just four years and admissions has become somewhat of a lottery. K-12 is what sets kids up for success, not college. At that point it is too late.


Plenty of public school grads go to T10 colleges, don’t fit in or struggle, and move onto middle management type careers because they never were given the tools to succeed from public. Studying for 16 APs and trying to ace standardized tests doesn’t give you direction or real skills in life.

Plenty also do well. This is like a caricature of the differences as well as the outcomes. Sounds like a huge cope, per OP’s question.

There is plenty to not like about public schools but this take is absurd.

Not really. Most non-magnet public school students at top colleges struggle and don’t have good outcomes afterwards.

That’s an idiotic statement, with zero factual basis.

Kids who graduate Langley or Whitman or Palo Alto High school or any number of high performing public schools located in wealthy areas do just fine at top colleges and many have great outcomes.

Alright, but what about the average public school kid who makes it to a top college? Are they having great outcomes? They are not.

Whomever you are referring is a tiny %age of kids at top colleges. The kids above (plus magnet) are the “average” public school kid at a top college.

It’s a myth to think the valedictorian of Dunbar HS goes to a top school. It happens once in a blue moon, but that’s not the norm.