College Counseling at Sidwell - One Year Later

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your answer seems to be the Sidwell magically knows one of their kids is on the cusp of getting one of those spots and fights for it. Its ridiculous. They won't know.

Why does Sidwell have to know with any level of certainty? It’s easy enough for them to make educated guesses about who’s a lock, who’s a reach, and who’s somewhere in between or on the cusp based on the school’s decades-old track record of who tends to get in with what kinds of applicant profiles. This isn’t rocket science, and they don’t even need Naviance to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school is fine. However, each student has to stand on their own merits, unless they are legacy applicants.

Not true. Legacy applicants have to stand on their own merits too. They simply don't have to be slam dunk credentials to get in, but do need to be at least within shouting distance. And that's true whether applying from Sidwell or any public school.

Which means they don’t have to stand on their own merits. They don’t have to be as good.

[Anonymous]

But they still have to be very good, which means standing on their own merits at least a large percentage of the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But they still have to be very good, which means standing on their own merits at least a large percentage of the way.

But not the whole way. The legacy student simply does not have to work as hard or be as good, only good enough to almost get there. They don’t stand on their own. They get carried.

[Anonymous]

Actually, no. Legacy status only tends to make a difference in tie-breaker/close call situations. That's not being carried. When you reach that point, the school has already determined that you're good enough to get in on the merits, but for space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But they still have to be very good, which means standing on their own merits at least a large percentage of the way.

But not the whole way. The legacy student simply does not have to work as hard or be as good, only good enough to almost get there. They don’t stand on their own. They get carried.

Like URMs and sports recruits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the PP puts too much stock into the "Advisory" system. It is the homeroom where they take attendance each morning and little else.

PP is referring to the upper school advisory system, which is pretty useless.

Yes, it is just a homeroom and they pass out the mid-semester reports. I am not sure what else the person deriding the system wants.

Many independent schools use the advisory system in high school as the basis for students to form a key relationship with a member of the faculty. Someone who can help/encourage/guide/inspire, etc. students as they make their way through high school. The term “advisor” kind of speaks for itself, but not at Sidwell.

I'd agree that the (home-room styled) "advisory" structure in Sidwell's Upper School is not intended to fill this purpose. While some "advisors" may choose to create this sort of relationship with their advisory students, it is not their responsibility.

As a Sidwell parent, however, I would love the advisory structure to move more in this direction. It would be especially helpful in 9th grade, when there are many new students to the school and when all students adjusting to HS (even those who were at SFS in MS).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, no. Legacy status only tends to make a difference in tie-breaker/close call situations. That's not being carried. When you reach that point, the school has already determined that you're good enough to get in on the merits, but for space.

So the legacy gets in because they are legacy, right? So the non-legacy has to be better than the legacy to avoid the tie-breaker situation. And the thing that breaks a tie is something the legacy gets through no virtue of their own.

[Anonymous]

But some non-legacies get in too when in the close call/tie-breaker situation.

The broader point that you're missing is that the admissions world isn't binary. Lots of applicants who are equally qualified when completely ignoring legacy status end up with completely different outcomes, often due to the sheer luck of demographics/talents of the class that's already been admitted. Which nears that some get in, some are WL, some are denied. All were equally deserving on the merits, but the school had only so many spots.

It may be the case that, for this large pool of borderline cases, among the legacy applicants, 30 percent get in, 20 percent are WL, 50 percent are denied. And for the non-legacy applicants, 15 percent get in, 15 percent are WL, 70 percent are denied. Of course this data would suggest that legacies have an advantage, but how can you credibly claim that legacy status is dispositive when 70 percent of the legacy applicants are either WL or denied?

[Anonymous]

Admissions are tough these days. But getting back to the thread, surely everyone can agree that it is better to have school college counselors who are engaged, smart, strategic, hard-working, pro-active and great communicators — versus disengaged, less knowledgeable, reactive, low-energy and passive, and poor communicators? SFS has made progress year over year in the college counseling office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your answer seems to be the Sidwell magically knows one of their kids is on the cusp of getting one of those spots and fights for it. Its ridiculous. They won't know.

Why does Sidwell have to know with any level of certainty? It’s easy enough for them to make educated guesses about who’s a lock, who’s a reach, and who’s somewhere in between or on the cusp based on the school’s decades-old track record of who tends to get in with what kinds of applicant profiles. This isn’t rocket science, and they don’t even need Naviance to do it.

For the schools that take 15% or fewer applicants, there is no way to know. It is all a lottery, even for a 4.0, student president, 9 varsity letter athlete from Sidwell who has done 200 hours of community service and has 1600 boards.

[Anonymous]

Not if, historically, Sidwell sends multiple seniors each year to this school taking 15% or fewer applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But some non-legacies get in too when in the close call/tie-breaker situation.

The broader point that you're missing is that the admissions world isn't binary. Lots of applicants who are equally qualified when completely ignoring legacy status end up with completely different outcomes, often due to the sheer luck of demographics/talents of the class that's already been admitted. Which nears that some get in, some are WL, some are denied. All were equally deserving on the merits, but the school had only so many spots.

It may be the case that, for this large pool of borderline cases, among the legacy applicants, 30 percent get in, 20 percent are WL, 50 percent are denied. And for the non-legacy applicants, 15 percent get in, 15 percent are WL, 70 percent are denied. Of course this data would suggest that legacies have an advantage, but how can you credibly claim that legacy status is dispositive when 70 percent of the legacy applicants are either WL or denied?

In your hypothetical, two applicants are equal except for the legacy status of one and that one is twice as likely to be admitted and didn’t do anything themselves to earn that bump. That’s a hook.

[Anonymous]

Of course it's a hook. I never suggested otherwise. But it doesn't mean that they didn't get in on merit, because they were just as qualified as the non-legacy applicants. Luck simply happened to be in their favor, because they still had to defy the odds for admission over the majority of other equally qualified legacies and non-legacies who weren't so fortunate. Most likely, they had a profile that the school was seeking to round out a diverse student body. In a different year, a non-legacy's profile may have been what was needed. It's random chance, which many folks on DCUM just won't admit.

[Anonymous]

I agree. They are just as qualified, not more qualified. So they got in on the legacy status, not their own merit. Not if they were just as qualified.