College admissions from low SES

[Anonymous]

Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

[Anonymous]

Top

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

Top 1% mostly sends their kids to privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

Top 1% mostly sends their kids to privates.

Not the point. You didn’t control for the top end of wealth in the schools.

[Anonymous]

My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

Top 1% mostly sends their kids to privates.

Then half of Herndon can be bussed to Langley and if the Langley 1% don’t like it they can go to private, right? DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

There isn’t a higher chance of getting into a more competitive university because most kids in those environments will have been challenged less and will end up with lower scores and less impressive achievements by the time they apply to college.

That’s generally understood in real life, which is why people seek out the top K-12 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

Top 1% mostly sends their kids to privates.

Then half of Herndon can be bussed to Langley and if the Langley 1% don’t like it they can go to private, right? DP

Dopey non-sequitur comment, as one would expect here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

There isn’t a higher chance of getting into a more competitive university because most kids in those environments will have been challenged less and will end up with lower scores and less impressive achievements by the time they apply to college.

That’s generally understood in real life, which is why people seek out the top K-12 schools.

I hear this a lot -- that children are challenged less in a lower SES school. Are there different maths taught from one school to another? What is geometry like at Langley? And how is it different at Herndon? Is there Math for Rich People and Math for Poor People?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley had 1.86 non-FARMS kids for every non-FARMS kid at Justice but 23 NMSF for every NMSF at Justice.

That’s not controlling for too 1%

Top 1% mostly sends their kids to privates.

Then half of Herndon can be bussed to Langley and if the Langley 1% don’t like it they can go to private, right? DP

Dopey non-sequitur comment, as one would expect here.

Good to know you don’t have a rebuttal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

There isn’t a higher chance of getting into a more competitive university because most kids in those environments will have been challenged less and will end up with lower scores and less impressive achievements by the time they apply to college.

That’s generally understood in real life, which is why people seek out the top K-12 schools.

I hear this a lot -- that children are challenged less in a lower SES school. Are there different maths taught from one school to another? What is geometry like at Langley? And how is it different at Herndon? Is there Math for Rich People and Math for Poor People?

Most of the kids at Langley and McLean are taking Geometry H or Algebra 2 H in 9th grade while most of the kids at Lewis and Herndon are going to be in Algebra 1 or Geometry, not honors. That is going to change what classes are offered in Junior and Senior year and the number of sections available for the AP classes. So the class material is the same but the class offerings are going to be different because of the number of kids interested in those classes that will influence what is available.

There are different classes offered because of the smaller number of kids who are taking AP/IB courses at a lower SES school. Since there are fewer kids available for those classes there are fewer sections offered, which increases the likelihood of a conflict between classes and not taking some classes.

AP Calc BC will have more students ready for it and interested in it by Junior years at Langley than at Herndon. There will be more sections of it and it will be easier to fit into a schedule. There will be a lot of students at Herndon who don’t have a shot at AP Calc AB at Herndon because they are taking Algebra, non Honors, as Freshman. Langley will have a lot of kids in AP Calc AB and a good number of kids in Calc BC. Then they will take Multivariate Calc.

[Anonymous]

This isn’t just about Langley and McLean. People with options pick West Springfield over Lewis, Woodson over Falls Church, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

There isn’t a higher chance of getting into a more competitive university because most kids in those environments will have been challenged less and will end up with lower scores and less impressive achievements by the time they apply to college.

That’s generally understood in real life, which is why people seek out the top K-12 schools.

please don’t speak about things you know nothing about. All you have to do is take a look at the colleges and universities the graduates from ALL of the high schools in FCPS attend. And this just reflects the school the student chose and not all the schools they got accepted into.

You know nothing about any of these individual students and what their capabilities are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will get way more opportunity at a “lesser” school because they can thrive in an environment that isn’t a pressure cooker. Can some kids thrive in that kind of environment? Sure. But for most kids it isn’t sustainable. They can play on a variety of sports teams because it isn’t as competitive. They are maybe more middle to top of the pack because they aren’t in a competitive academic environment. and as others have pointed out, there is a higher chance of getting into more competitive/elite universities.

There isn’t a higher chance of getting into a more competitive university because most kids in those environments will have been challenged less and will end up with lower scores and less impressive achievements by the time they apply to college.

That’s generally understood in real life, which is why people seek out the top K-12 schools.

please don’t speak about things you know nothing about. All you have to do is take a look at the colleges and universities the graduates from ALL of the high schools in FCPS attend. And this just reflects the school the student chose and not all the schools they got accepted into.

You know nothing about any of these individual students and what their capabilities are.

We do know about some of their capabilities, or at least accomplishments, as they are far less frequently recognized for academic achievements.