private school admissions--what sets kids apart?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Test scores, first choice letters, legacy, URM, sports, being potentially very large donors in addition to full pay.

You seem very confident that you know what went into the other kids' applications, and sometimes there are things that their parents haven't mentioned to you.


I agree with this. We have been through admissions multiple times with our kids. The times we have been successful, it felt like an all-out siege, but none of the strategizing and effort would have been visible to other parents.


What did you do that wouldn’t have been obvious to others?

We have been accepted to 2nd tier schools only and WL at first tier. I still don’t understand why. ISEE scores 7,8,9,9; national placement in science; city recognition for art portfolio (submitted to school); plays 4 sports; UMC family that is active at K-8; parent recognized for school donations; well written parent statements and student essay. Applied to top tier in K, 6, and 9 - all WL. I know legacy kids with lower stats who get in. The non-legacy kids (very view) who do get in have similar stats. What did you do differently?


Did you ask the HoS at your K-8 why your child was not admitted to top tier for 9th? HoS at St Pats, Lowell, Sheridan, Norwood would know.


Yes, I asked, but I feel like I got a 'non-answer' - "competition was steep and there were just so many great kids and not enough spots". It just seems like other "great kids" similar to mine get the spots and never my kid. Oh well, my focus is on my younger ones now and I'm not sure top tier is for them - I'm tempted to send them there the older ones went for simplicity.


Your emphasis on "first tier" and "2nd tier" could be your answer.


Are you saying there isn't a pecking order in high schools or just that it is supposed to remain unsaid?


You’re saying too much of the quiet part out loud. Also focused too much on rankings instead of showing fit. You’re supposed to say things like “Jr wants to go to the library every day to learn after school and is looking for a school where there are more kids like her,” not “we’re looking for Jr to be in a top tier school.”

This is also internally in your K-8 discussions with teachers and administrators. If you don’t show you know why your daughter would be a better fit at NCS than Holton beyond that NCS is ranked first, especially if administrators think Holton would also be a fit or might be a better fit, they may not bat for you with NCS.


So gross and eye-rolly. How do you do that crap and not vomit all over yourselves? You know in 20 years NONE of this will matter!


I don’t. But I know people who do, and do so successfully.

I also think this practice is completely unfair. For all these schools’ talk about systemic bias no one seems to realize that parents of most kids coming from underprivileged backgrounds don’t know don’t have time to learn the difference between Sidwell and GDS. They just want their kids to go to the best schools and “get ahead,” sometimes without much of an idea of what that means. It’s unfair to ask them to have a reason to want to a school beyond “I want the best for my child.”


Unfair and hypocritical. Yes, you are getting it now.



No, I got it before too. Got it 20 years ago when I had to learn the first time.

FWIW, these rules only continue as your child progresses through school. Everyone is curious about the VIPs, but you’re not supposed to say so out loud. You have to treat VIPs like normal people even if they’re not. You have to talk about racial justice and equity but then understand everyone will go to their racist country clubs after the DEI meeting including the then HoS. The list goes on and on.

You have to decide if you want it enough to play by their rules. If you do, there they are. If you don’t, then you should be happy not to have to.

When you understand this, maybe you’ll finally understand why some people prefer for their kids to be in public or so-called not “top tier” schools.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Test scores, first choice letters, legacy, URM, sports, being potentially very large donors in addition to full pay.

You seem very confident that you know what went into the other kids' applications, and sometimes there are things that their parents haven't mentioned to you.


I agree with this. We have been through admissions multiple times with our kids. The times we have been successful, it felt like an all-out siege, but none of the strategizing and effort would have been visible to other parents.


What did you do that wouldn’t have been obvious to others?

We have been accepted to 2nd tier schools only and WL at first tier. I still don’t understand why. ISEE scores 7,8,9,9; national placement in science; city recognition for art portfolio (submitted to school); plays 4 sports; UMC family that is active at K-8; parent recognized for school donations; well written parent statements and student essay. Applied to top tier in K, 6, and 9 - all WL. I know legacy kids with lower stats who get in. The non-legacy kids (very view) who do get in have similar stats. What did you do differently?


Did you ask the HoS at your K-8 why your child was not admitted to top tier for 9th? HoS at St Pats, Lowell, Sheridan, Norwood would know.


Yes, I asked, but I feel like I got a 'non-answer' - "competition was steep and there were just so many great kids and not enough spots". It just seems like other "great kids" similar to mine get the spots and never my kid. Oh well, my focus is on my younger ones now and I'm not sure top tier is for them - I'm tempted to send them there the older ones went for simplicity.


Your emphasis on "first tier" and "2nd tier" could be your answer.


Are you saying there isn't a pecking order in high schools or just that it is supposed to remain unsaid?


You’re saying too much of the quiet part out loud. Also focused too much on rankings instead of showing fit. You’re supposed to say things like “Jr wants to go to the library every day to learn after school and is looking for a school where there are more kids like her,” not “we’re looking for Jr to be in a top tier school.”

This is also internally in your K-8 discussions with teachers and administrators. If you don’t show you know why your daughter would be a better fit at NCS than Holton beyond that NCS is ranked first, especially if administrators think Holton would also be a fit or might be a better fit, they may not bat for you with NCS.


So gross and eye-rolly. How do you do that crap and not vomit all over yourselves? You know in 20 years NONE of this will matter!


I don’t. But I know people who do, and do so successfully.

I also think this practice is completely unfair. For all these schools’ talk about systemic bias no one seems to realize that parents of most kids coming from underprivileged backgrounds don’t know don’t have time to learn the difference between Sidwell and GDS. They just want their kids to go to the best schools and “get ahead,” sometimes without much of an idea of what that means. It’s unfair to ask them to have a reason to want to a school beyond “I want the best for my child.”


Why exactly is it unfair? Because you assume they don't have the fortitude to make a distinction? Equating privilege, or lack there of, with an (in)ability to appropriately analyze options is at best, short-sighted, at worst, insulting. Underprivileged is not synonymous with incapable or stupid.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Test scores, first choice letters, legacy, URM, sports, being potentially very large donors in addition to full pay.

You seem very confident that you know what went into the other kids' applications, and sometimes there are things that their parents haven't mentioned to you.


I agree with this. We have been through admissions multiple times with our kids. The times we have been successful, it felt like an all-out siege, but none of the strategizing and effort would have been visible to other parents.


What did you do that wouldn’t have been obvious to others?

We have been accepted to 2nd tier schools only and WL at first tier. I still don’t understand why. ISEE scores 7,8,9,9; national placement in science; city recognition for art portfolio (submitted to school); plays 4 sports; UMC family that is active at K-8; parent recognized for school donations; well written parent statements and student essay. Applied to top tier in K, 6, and 9 - all WL. I know legacy kids with lower stats who get in. The non-legacy kids (very view) who do get in have similar stats. What did you do differently?


Did you ask the HoS at your K-8 why your child was not admitted to top tier for 9th? HoS at St Pats, Lowell, Sheridan, Norwood would know.


Yes, I asked, but I feel like I got a 'non-answer' - "competition was steep and there were just so many great kids and not enough spots". It just seems like other "great kids" similar to mine get the spots and never my kid. Oh well, my focus is on my younger ones now and I'm not sure top tier is for them - I'm tempted to send them there the older ones went for simplicity.


Your emphasis on "first tier" and "2nd tier" could be your answer.


Are you saying there isn't a pecking order in high schools or just that it is supposed to remain unsaid?


You’re saying too much of the quiet part out loud. Also focused too much on rankings instead of showing fit. You’re supposed to say things like “Jr wants to go to the library every day to learn after school and is looking for a school where there are more kids like her,” not “we’re looking for Jr to be in a top tier school.”

This is also internally in your K-8 discussions with teachers and administrators. If you don’t show you know why your daughter would be a better fit at NCS than Holton beyond that NCS is ranked first, especially if administrators think Holton would also be a fit or might be a better fit, they may not bat for you with NCS.


So gross and eye-rolly. How do you do that crap and not vomit all over yourselves? You know in 20 years NONE of this will matter!


I don’t. But I know people who do, and do so successfully.

I also think this practice is completely unfair. For all these schools’ talk about systemic bias no one seems to realize that parents of most kids coming from underprivileged backgrounds don’t know don’t have time to learn the difference between Sidwell and GDS. They just want their kids to go to the best schools and “get ahead,” sometimes without much of an idea of what that means. It’s unfair to ask them to have a reason to want to a school beyond “I want the best for my child.”


Why exactly is it unfair? Because you assume they don't have the fortitude to make a distinction? Equating privilege, or lack there of, with an (in)ability to appropriately analyze options is at best, short-sighted, at worst, insulting. Underprivileged is not synonymous with incapable or stupid.


What distinction is there between SFS and GDS? Is one more ethical and less racist? I was able to follow the thread until these posts.
Anonymous
There's two questions that are usually asked when you apply: why our school? And what other schools are you applying to?

This isn't to sus out the competition. This is to see if you're applying non-discriminately to all "Tier 1" and some "Tier 2"s. Or are they looking for something specific? Do you really know the school and know it'll be a good fit? If it seems like where you're applying is random, I'd make sure to include, we've looked into every school who offers robust math programs with a good swim team, etc. This is where knowing some kids who attend really help, We're good friends with Larla and Doug who talk about Ms Smith, the super math teacher who makes trigonometry seem like 1+1.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Test scores, first choice letters, legacy, URM, sports, being potentially very large donors in addition to full pay.

You seem very confident that you know what went into the other kids' applications, and sometimes there are things that their parents haven't mentioned to you.


I agree with this. We have been through admissions multiple times with our kids. The times we have been successful, it felt like an all-out siege, but none of the strategizing and effort would have been visible to other parents.


What did you do that wouldn’t have been obvious to others?

We have been accepted to 2nd tier schools only and WL at first tier. I still don’t understand why. ISEE scores 7,8,9,9; national placement in science; city recognition for art portfolio (submitted to school); plays 4 sports; UMC family that is active at K-8; parent recognized for school donations; well written parent statements and student essay. Applied to top tier in K, 6, and 9 - all WL. I know legacy kids with lower stats who get in. The non-legacy kids (very view) who do get in have similar stats. What did you do differently?


Did you ask the HoS at your K-8 why your child was not admitted to top tier for 9th? HoS at St Pats, Lowell, Sheridan, Norwood would know.


Yes, I asked, but I feel like I got a 'non-answer' - "competition was steep and there were just so many great kids and not enough spots". It just seems like other "great kids" similar to mine get the spots and never my kid. Oh well, my focus is on my younger ones now and I'm not sure top tier is for them - I'm tempted to send them there the older ones went for simplicity.


Your emphasis on "first tier" and "2nd tier" could be your answer.


Are you saying there isn't a pecking order in high schools or just that it is supposed to remain unsaid?


You’re saying too much of the quiet part out loud. Also focused too much on rankings instead of showing fit. You’re supposed to say things like “Jr wants to go to the library every day to learn after school and is looking for a school where there are more kids like her,” not “we’re looking for Jr to be in a top tier school.”

This is also internally in your K-8 discussions with teachers and administrators. If you don’t show you know why your daughter would be a better fit at NCS than Holton beyond that NCS is ranked first, especially if administrators think Holton would also be a fit or might be a better fit, they may not bat for you with NCS.


So gross and eye-rolly. How do you do that crap and not vomit all over yourselves? You know in 20 years NONE of this will matter!


I don’t. But I know people who do, and do so successfully.

I also think this practice is completely unfair. For all these schools’ talk about systemic bias no one seems to realize that parents of most kids coming from underprivileged backgrounds don’t know don’t have time to learn the difference between Sidwell and GDS. They just want their kids to go to the best schools and “get ahead,” sometimes without much of an idea of what that means. It’s unfair to ask them to have a reason to want to a school beyond “I want the best for my child.”


Why exactly is it unfair? Because you assume they don't have the fortitude to make a distinction? Equating privilege, or lack there of, with an (in)ability to appropriately analyze options is at best, short-sighted, at worst, insulting. Underprivileged is not synonymous with incapable or stupid.


Have you ever been underprivileged? I have. Where I come from, people don't use phrases like "fortitude to make a distinction." People use phrases like "you know those presidents sent their girls to Sidwell." When I had to write my "Why Princeton" essay, my dad said, "That essay is stupid. You just write, 'Because it's Princeton.' There. Three words. Done." I had to explain that it wasn't how that worked, and that when there was a 250 word limit, the essay shouldn't be 3 words. By that point, I was more privileged than he was, even though he was more capable than I.
Anonymous
It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
One very intelligent, career-driven mom’s overachieving child was rejected or waitlisted everywhere because of her own oblivious and obnoxious behavior. When she found out via the HoS inquiring that she was the reason her child not accepted, she then started explaining how the schools were short-sighted and missing out by not accepting her child. This might all be true, but it also exemplifies the very behavior that might have prevented her from being a wanted member of the community.


And I bet she's on DCUM now disparaging that school at every turn and pretending to be a parent there.
Anonymous
For us I think it was family involvement. DH at our previous school got really involved in organizing fathers' events. You don't see that at a lot of schools, and getting other fathers involved in the school (through events) can lead to more donations if the fathers feel more connected.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.


Again, have you interviewed warehouse workers? This is exactly the kind of answer that is given sometimes.

I don't argue with you that this is the way the game is played. I do think people are blind if they don't see the chasm between where some kids are coming from and the culture they're trying to enter. When the chasm is driven by priviledge and the school talks so much about equity, perhaps they should not be blind about this chasm.
Anonymous
I wish this thread existed when all of us were applying. Back then it was mad with flinging in all directions. I'm sure there were people who hesitated after reading all of the negative comments about schools.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.



This is nearly exactly what I was going to write. When I interview people for a job, I always ask "why do you want to work here....and why do you want this role". The reason I ask is to better understand what is motivating them. I want to make sure they aren't just obsessed with the prestige. When my children were going through this process, we wanted to find the places that felt like good fits for them. Sure, I wanted them to go to great schools, but we didn't just apply to the "Big 3/5". In fact, my daughter disliked one of the ones typically referred to in the Big3 so much that she asked to withdraw her application. They both ended up at a great school, and for them...they didn't even know it was one of the best schools in the DC area...my older daughter just fell in love with the school and felt like she belonged there. She was right because it's been amazing so far. But I truly think that in addition to them being good candidates, it was also obvious why we were choosing that school and it wasn't for the rank.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.


Again, have you interviewed warehouse workers? This is exactly the kind of answer that is given sometimes.

I don't argue with you that this is the way the game is played. I do think people are blind if they don't see the chasm between where some kids are coming from and the culture they're trying to enter. When the chasm is driven by priviledge and the school talks so much about equity, perhaps they should not be blind about this chasm.


And the warehouse response wouldn't work for the top tiered schools...but you are right...the challenge is that not everyone understands how to play the game and handle the interviews.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.


Again, have you interviewed warehouse workers? This is exactly the kind of answer that is given sometimes.

I don't argue with you that this is the way the game is played. I do think people are blind if they don't see the chasm between where some kids are coming from and the culture they're trying to enter. When the chasm is driven by priviledge and the school talks so much about equity, perhaps they should not be blind about this chasm.


And the warehouse response wouldn't work for the top tiered schools...but you are right...the challenge is that not everyone understands how to play the game and handle the interviews.


NP here. It's not just the interviews. It's also the essays and responses to questions. Here are two things that we did that I think really helped (we were applying for 9th, but likely this would apply anywhere from 6th on).

1) Focus on the school's stated values and philosophies and try to point back to them in interviews, essays, questions etc. Talk about how you are looking for a place that embodies those things and express how you see it played out in the school and why it will be good for your kid.

2) Think about how you "market" your child. This means creating a framework about how you want to present your kid and also how you think about schools.

Example:
Kid is a steller violist, shy, loves Spanish, is applying to NCS, whose core values are excellence, service, courage, conscience. Now, you write about how your student is looking for a school where they can contribute through the languages of music and Spanish, how they excel and are more "fluent" in those mediums. And how you are looking for a school that will support her courage to become more confident in other "languages." Daughter writes an essay about performing on stage, lessons learned, and how her ultimate goal is to be on stage in a venue like the national cathedral, playing as a representative and serving her school and community.

The point is, make it easy for them. Connect the dots between your kid and the school as well as paint a clear and simple picture of your child. You get the idea.



Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.


Again, have you interviewed warehouse workers? This is exactly the kind of answer that is given sometimes.

I don't argue with you that this is the way the game is played. I do think people are blind if they don't see the chasm between where some kids are coming from and the culture they're trying to enter. When the chasm is driven by priviledge and the school talks so much about equity, perhaps they should not be blind about this chasm.


Back before J. D. Vance went totally off the rails, this was exactly the point he made in Hillbilly Elegy. There are certain advantages if you come from the right class or the right background that you don't even know you have.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s like in a job interview. When they say “Why do you want to work here?” The answer can’t just be, “I really need a job and all my friends will be impressed if I get one at Fancy Corp., plus I like the benefits here.” And no one argues with that - it’s just the way the game is played. This is the school admissions version.


Again, have you interviewed warehouse workers? This is exactly the kind of answer that is given sometimes.

I don't argue with you that this is the way the game is played. I do think people are blind if they don't see the chasm between where some kids are coming from and the culture they're trying to enter. When the chasm is driven by priviledge and the school talks so much about equity, perhaps they should not be blind about this chasm.


Back before J. D. Vance went totally off the rails, this was exactly the point he made in Hillbilly Elegy. There are certain advantages if you come from the right class or the right background that you don't even know you have.


Yes, and for most things I have great sympathy. However, people who have 50K a year to spend on school have privilege enough to expect them to figure this out.
post reply Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools
Message Quick Reply
Go to: