Can a kid who is not an URM, or recruited athlete or legacy get into an Ivy from a DC private?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

[Anonymous]

If you've sent your DC to a private school simply to improve their chances of getting into an Ivy, you are in for a world of disappointment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has data because the schools don't want you to know this.

-But talk to any parent of a senior this year or last.
-Talk to a NW DC college admissions counselor.
-Look at the schools' student-run Instagram pages from last year and this year (not prefect but give trends)

Listen, we're not making this up for kicks and thrills or to start drama for fun. Pretty much no one is getting in who isn't a minority or an athlete or a big donor's kid.
OR feel free to keep paying the $55K per year and keep your head in the sand until your kid's senior year and you see this play out with your own kid. That's honestly probably the best approach.

We keep paying the 55k per child each year for the education and experience. If my kids become interested in top colleges, cool. But that's certainly not why we're there.

This. Why some people think that the quality of the last four years of education is more important than the quality of the previous 13 is beyond me.

It’s because they think the only point of going to one school vs another is to get into a particular college. It’s a myopic, unintelligent way of looking at schooling.

It’s not the only factor but you are entirely kidding yourself if you don’t think a vast majority of parents consider this as one of the key factors to want to spend this type of money in a region (at least MoCo and NOVA) with some of the top public school systems in the world.

I went to private school, and I’m sending my daughter to one. College admissions isn’t a factor for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has data because the schools don't want you to know this.

-But talk to any parent of a senior this year or last.
-Talk to a NW DC college admissions counselor.
-Look at the schools' student-run Instagram pages from last year and this year (not prefect but give trends)

Listen, we're not making this up for kicks and thrills or to start drama for fun. Pretty much no one is getting in who isn't a minority or an athlete or a big donor's kid.
OR feel free to keep paying the $55K per year and keep your head in the sand until your kid's senior year and you see this play out with your own kid. That's honestly probably the best approach.

We keep paying the 55k per child each year for the education and experience. If my kids become interested in top colleges, cool. But that's certainly not why we're there.

This. Why some people think that the quality of the last four years of education is more important than the quality of the previous 13 is beyond me.

It’s because they think the only point of going to one school vs another is to get into a particular college. It’s a myopic, unintelligent way of looking at schooling.

It’s not the only factor but you are entirely kidding yourself if you don’t think a vast majority of parents consider this as one of the key factors to want to spend this type of money in a region (at least MoCo and NOVA) with some of the top public school systems in the world.

My kids' big3 has been open with parents for a decade that the college admissions landscape has been changing and that the AO is much less able to influence T20 admittance for unhooked kids. This message has been louder and more direct in the past few years. The last 2 years of the admission cycle has been brutal. I think most of us have accepted this, but, there are also a lot of parents in this crowd who basically think it is tragic if there kid does not get into a T20 school. It is hard for these folks to hear this message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

But the percentage of kids from private schools going to Ivies hasn’t changed. Unless you can show data that proves otherwise?

[Anonymous]

The NYTimes had an opinion piece last October that flies in the face of the hypothesis on this thread. Sorry. Private schools still dominate.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/01/opinion/school-private-college.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

But the percentage of kids from private schools going to Ivies hasn’t changed. Unless you can show data that proves otherwise?

The point (made upthread) is that the people with the data, private schools, are changing the way they recruit for 9th so that they can maintain the quality of their college lists. They used to pick off the smart kids. Now they pick off VIPs/URMs/athletes. So the numbers from the school are roughly the same, but the analysis for the parents of a smart kid is very different.

[Anonymous]

Here’s an Inside Higher Ed article that says the same thing.

https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2021/03/22/do-top-colleges-favor-applicants-who-are-extremely-wealthy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

But the percentage of kids from private schools going to Ivies hasn’t changed. Unless you can show data that proves otherwise?

The point (made upthread) is that the people with the data, private schools, are changing the way they recruit for 9th so that they can maintain the quality of their college lists. They used to pick off the smart kids. Now they pick off VIPs/URMs/athletes. So the numbers from the school are roughly the same, but the analysis for the parents of a smart kid is very different.

LOL.

They’ve always given preference to those categories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

But the percentage of kids from private schools going to Ivies hasn’t changed. Unless you can show data that proves otherwise?

Not me. I just have anecdotal, and therefore highly suspect, data from people I know living in my neighborhood. No Ivy admits from privates, some from public magnets, a few from regular public schools. Since I have a senior, I've been talking to private and public school parents, and the level of stress and general resentment against the system is sky-high in both.

So if you have the data and I don't, I'm not going to argue. But private school is very definitely not a magic ticket to anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private school kids are overrepresented at Ivy League and other top schools, relative to the overall student population.

But sure — keep up the myth.

I believe you, but this happens in areas where the public schools just can't keep up. The DC area is not a normal metropolis. It is where overly-educated workers congregate, which makes the area public schools really competitive. So for this area, your general statement may not be true.

Most of Harvard’s class comes from the Northeast, where public schools are arguably the strongest. Your argument simply doesn’t hold water against actual data.

Right, but there are other Ivies than Harvard, and we're talking about a trend - that Ivies recruit LESS from private schools nowadays, compared to before.


I think this conversation is moot anyway, because the REAL problem is that admissions are becoming more and more unpredictable. Test-optional is a nightmare for admissions officers who now lack national standardized data to compare kids across regions and school systems with varying levels of grade inflation. The advantage of high-reputation privates lies in the fact they do not inflate grades, and are therefore "trusted" by colleges, but test-optional is still wreaking havoc on every single high school in the US, public and private. Hence why privately-hired counselors are now advising students to apply to more colleges than ever before - if the candidate is a regular white bread American without an unusual life story, it's a lottery and they have to apply widely.

But the percentage of kids from private schools going to Ivies hasn’t changed. Unless you can show data that proves otherwise?

Not me. I just have anecdotal, and therefore highly suspect, data from people I know living in my neighborhood. No Ivy admits from privates, some from public magnets, a few from regular public schools. Since I have a senior, I've been talking to private and public school parents, and the level of stress and general resentment against the system is sky-high in both.

So if you have the data and I don't, I'm not going to argue. But private school is very definitely not a magic ticket to anywhere.

I’m not arguing it is. But the reality is that these schools haven’t admitted fewer private school kids overall. Can you point to one year at one school where maybe admits were weak? Sure, maybe. But that’s not necessarily indicative of a broader pattern.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who is trying to pick a high school thinking it will change their child's college outcome is setting themselves up for disappointment, and setting their child up for depression and anxiety.

Stop doing this to yourselves.

[Anonymous]

We really shouldn't turn this into a public vs. private debate because in 2023 the odds aren't great from either side (at least in ED).

The DMV is packed with 1)legacies, 2)extreme wealth 3)URMs 4)athletes.
So the kids taken from the DMV are going to almost all be from these categories because there are plenty of kids who are super smart and who satisfy 1 (and usually 2, 3 or 4) of these institutional needs.
Kids from Vermont (which has almost zero URMs and far fewer legacies per capita and probably very, very few big donor legacies) are far more likely to be just white and unhooked.

The current reality is the same in every educated urban area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We really shouldn't turn this into a public vs. private debate because in 2023 the odds aren't great from either side (at least in ED).

The DMV is packed with 1)legacies, 2)extreme wealth 3)URMs 4)athletes.
So the kids taken from the DMV are going to almost all be from these categories because there are plenty of kids who are super smart and who satisfy 1 (and usually 2, 3 or 4) of these institutional needs.
Kids from Vermont (which has almost zero URMs and far fewer legacies per capita and probably very, very few big donor legacies) are far more likely to be just white and unhooked.

The current reality is the same in every educated urban area.

And that’s been the reality for an extremely long time.