Bottom Half at Sidwell - How is college placement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I can see the reason for the confusion R/T my post. DS does not go to Sidwell, but another NW DC Independant school, where I said the average kid is an "A" student. There is no grade inflation at my DS's school. What I am saying is that, if you took 70% of the kids at DS's school and put them at any other school they would be in the top 10% of the class in terms of academic achievement. As an adult who went to public school where there was a broad range, its kind of obvious that DS's class is not an "average" group of kids. All you have to do is host a play date, its obvious . In short, its a fast crowd. Its like if you took the top kids from every local school around and sent them all to one school, then re-adjusted the curriculum so that you teach to that top 10% because that is the new "middle". Everyone is an A student. Its like giving the teachers all honors kids to work with and nothing else.

There are also kids there who are above average, but maybe not the CTY type. I imagine an average or just above average kid would have to work their ass off just to keep up ( this is based on my perpective as an adult who is asked to sign graded tests, essays, and , field "mom did you learn this in school " type questions. The answer is, no, not in 4th grade.

Maybe the "bottom half" of class still get s an A or two, but they work their ass off to get. Think Med school, think law school kind of working ass off, only they are 10, 11 years old. My point is, kids who get B's in such an environment are not unmotivated or as PP said, they are just in with a fast crowd and working as had as they can, and probably getting B's , once and a while an A, and the occasional C.
After a decade of that kind of applied study, any university would be lucky to have them.

But the point is, Sidwell and your own school are NOT the only schools where the kids work their asses off. You say your school is not Sidwell, but the kids are still working their asses off. In most of the top independent schools in the DMV area, it's fair to say that most kids are working their asses off. Public magnet and IB kids are working their asses off. Public school kids with long slates of APs are working their asses off.

Having just gone through the college admissions process, it seems pretty clear that working your ass off, for good grades and SATs, is just the *threshold* for admission to the most selective colleges. Harvard gets 33,000 applications from kids, most of whom have great grades and SATs and took the most challenging courses at their mostly competitive public and private schools. Colleges are looking for something even more - lopsided passions, national-level achievement, starting a business, sending thousands of dollars to a volunteer group. DC, who got into a top ivy, not only worked working her ass off, she had one of these additional accomplishments. Or there are hooks, like legacy or athletic.

So colleges are not going to give Sidwell, or any of the area independents for that matter, extra points for harder-than-usual work. If there's something going on, it would have to be because of the Sidwell name. That, I have no data on, except for the list above which I sort of wonder about, given what I've heard about recent Sidwell results and ED results from December. I wish Sidwell actually posted exmissions, like all the other independent schools in the area.

Having gone to "the Sidwell of NYC" I found this to be spot on. Everyone was smart and hard working but there was no way everyone would be going to an Ivy, although I am sure we all could have handled the work load. I was one of those "bottom half" kids who got mostly B+s and A-'s and one of the highest SAT scores in my grade. I worked my ass off from 6th grade on. Got into a top SLAC. I probably worked harder in HS than in college.

[Anonymous]

And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

[Anonymous]

PP, could you use the word " ass" a little more often ?

Perhaps just carried away by the thread's reference to Sidwell Friends' "bottom half"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. That's a multi-year tally, so if NYU is Columbia and if the numbers are accurate, than that's about 16-17% Ivy.

2. TJ's Ivy percentage is about 15%.

Good point; I missed the "per year". But 15%, is still very good. Similar to TJ.

[Anonymous]

All of you people prattling on about the Ivy League - you realize it's an just an athletic conference, right? You're no different on the gun-totin' rednecks down south (at whom you no doubt look down your noses) who woudl only let their kids go to an SEC school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of you people prattling on about the Ivy League - you realize it's an just an athletic conference, right? You're no different on the gun-totin' rednecks down south (at whom you no doubt look down your noses) who woudl only let their kids go to an SEC school.

I actually think the Ivy League is overrated too and a much better option for graduate school than it is for undergraduates. (Too much focus on graduate students at most of these schools IMHO). That said, it is still a potent admission ticket to career success. I'm not saying that it guarantees success, but it sure helps you get through the door in a way that not many other schools do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of you people prattling on about the Ivy League - you realize it's an just an athletic conference, right? You're no different on the gun-totin' rednecks down south (at whom you no doubt look down your noses) who woudl only let their kids go to an SEC school.

I think you're missing the point. I suspect that for most people, it's not that they are hellbent on children actually attending an Ivy; instead people are looking for ways to compare the strengths and weaknesses of different high schools. One measure of a high school is how well its grads do in college placement. People look as Ivy admissions as an easy proxy for how the school as a whole does in college placement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

Agree. I went to Sidwell, my kids do not, and they are having markedly better high school experiences than I did. And I think they will be just as well prepared for college academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

Agree. I went to Sidwell, my kids do not, and they are having markedly better high school experiences than I did. And I think they will be just as well prepared for college academically.

I guess this depends on the individual. I went to a Big3-type school in another city, where all students worked very hard and the top 20% or so went to Ivy or Ivy-equivalent colleges. My friends and I all were jealous during high school of our friends in local public schools who did not work nearly as hard (and also because we were stuck in a single-sex school). But when we talked after high school was over, we were all acknowledged that we really appreciated what the school taught us and how it prepared us for college, no matter how much we had complained during high school.

Maybe part of the difference in attitude stems from the fact that I grew up in a part of the country where it was less common to attend top-ranked colleges than it is around here. So when my friends and I earned spots in top colleges through hard work, we were proud of where the hard work got us and excited to press further. Around here, it seems many more people simply see top colleges as the norm, so perhaps they are less likely to appreciate their success, and more likely to remember negatively the struggles it took to get there.

None of that is meant as snarky criticism; just speculation on one possible reason for the difference. I know many people around here work very hard and appreciate the opportunities they receive as a result. I have nothing but respect for them all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

Agree. I went to Sidwell, my kids do not, and they are having markedly better high school experiences than I did. And I think they will be just as well prepared for college academically.

I guess this depends on the individual. I went to a Big3-type school in another city, where all students worked very hard and the top 20% or so went to Ivy or Ivy-equivalent colleges. My friends and I all were jealous during high school of our friends in local public schools who did not work nearly as hard (and also because we were stuck in a single-sex school). But when we talked after high school was over, we were all acknowledged that we really appreciated what the school taught us and how it prepared us for college, no matter how much we had complained during high school.

Maybe part of the difference in attitude stems from the fact that I grew up in a part of the country where it was less common to attend top-ranked colleges than it is around here. So when my friends and I earned spots in top colleges through hard work, we were proud of where the hard work got us and excited to press further. Around here, it seems many more people simply see top colleges as the norm, so perhaps they are less likely to appreciate their success, and more likely to remember negatively the struggles it took to get there.

None of that is meant as snarky criticism; just speculation on one possible reason for the difference. I know many people around here work very hard and appreciate the opportunities they receive as a result. I have nothing but respect for them all.

This thread is about the bottom half though, not the ivy bound top 15%. Being in the bottom half of a school like that is not necessarily a fabulous experience. And there are lots of great schools in the area, including public schools, where you can have the same college outcome and a more fulfilling HS experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about the bottom half though, not the ivy bound top 15%. Being in the bottom half of a school like that is not necessarily a fabulous experience. And there are lots of great schools in the area, including public schools, where you can have the same college outcome and a more fulfilling HS experience.

9:35 back. True enough that the thread began as a discussion about the bottom half. I thought the discussion was moving on to whether or not hard work for college success was worth it for the students. But it's fine to return to the original topic.

I don't know that any of us has enough information to compare objectively how the bottom half of a top high school did in college admissions against how those same students would have done at a local public school. My best gut sense is that if you took the bottom half of a top high school, and sent them to some local public school, they would not suddenly displace the other top public school students and become the new top 10% of the class. Instead, they likely settle comfortably into the middle of the public school class. Where that gets them for college, I don't know. Of course, I admit that's based on nothing but gut sense, so I could be totally wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

very good point. A friend said to me recently that after going through 8 years at a local "big 3" NW Private, the first couple of years of university were " a joke". The name of that university: Stanford.

As an athlete who got a full scholarship to college, I would echo the concerns that while rigorous work when you are a young kid/young teen will reap dividends, I was a bit burned out when I got to college when my sport basically became a job.

I do think kids need time to figure out who they are and key to this is unstructured time when they can pusue interests and not just be trying to prpepare for a test or write a paper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then you have to ask yourself if you think it makes sense to work harder in high school than college. I went to a Big 3 here and found it interesting to recently talk to some friends from school and learn that most of us felt like we showed up at college burnt out and wish we had done more to take advantage of what college had to offer. College has become the prize for all the competitive parenting so that all that matters is bragging rights. Maybe we should all step back and think about what we want for our kids along the way.

Agree. I went to Sidwell, my kids do not, and they are having markedly better high school experiences than I did. And I think they will be just as well prepared for college academically.

Interesting. Do you mind sharing a bit more, particularly what about your kids HS experience that you think is better. I would value your insight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you people prattling on about the Ivy League - you realize it's an just an athletic conference, right? You're no different on the gun-totin' rednecks down south (at whom you no doubt look down your noses) who woudl only let their kids go to an SEC school.

I think you're missing the point. I suspect that for most people, it's not that they are hellbent on children actually attending an Ivy; instead people are looking for ways to compare the strengths and weaknesses of different high schools. One measure of a high school is how well its grads do in college placement. People look as Ivy admissions as an easy proxy for how the school as a whole does in college placement.

There is no objective metric for evaluating schools. Period. And college placement is certainly not a good measurement for strengths and weaknesses since they screen students to begin with for not just the strengths that will help them get into college down the line (both academic and athletic) but because, Sidwell at least, has a bias for parents who attended top ivies, so they are also screening for legacies. Ultimately where a school has placed other students tells you nothing about whether it would be the right school for your child. I have two children who are very different so the weighing of strengths and weaknesses of schools has been very different (and has also varied over time).

College placement is only a measurement if you are going to measure how well the school fit your child by what college they attend. Hence all the crazy competitive parenting. if the school is a bad fit for your child it won't matter where other students have gone to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you people prattling on about the Ivy League - you realize it's an just an athletic conference, right? You're no different on the gun-totin' rednecks down south (at whom you no doubt look down your noses) who woudl only let their kids go to an SEC school.

I think you're missing the point. I suspect that for most people, it's not that they are hellbent on children actually attending an Ivy; instead people are looking for ways to compare the strengths and weaknesses of different high schools. One measure of a high school is how well its grads do in college placement. People look as Ivy admissions as an easy proxy for how the school as a whole does in college placement.

??? ummm, actually though the Ivy League is an athletic conference, the particular group of schools referred to as "Ivy" do have other commonalities: they are private( do not rely on state funds/ think state budget cuts) , very selective in admission, and have HUGE endowments which allow them to offer lots of FA to kids who qualify. Their endowments ( Harvard's is ? 500 Billion also allow them to attract top faculty by offering funded chairs of certain departments, guest lecturers who are leaders in their field, engage in leading scientific research, on and on. Their medical schools, which attract the best and brightest, staff teaching hospitals ( Mass General, Boston Children's, Penn, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Packard Children's/Stanford Medical Center , etc.. with the best and brigtest doctors to provide medical care to low income people who would not have this access otherwise.

Just to name a few things that set the Ivy's apart.