Forum Index
»
Private & Independent Schools
If schools made last year's admissions data widely available, would this be helpful to you?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I think it would be useful to know some very basic and already existing facts:
(1) how many openings, especially for entrance years like preK, K, 6th, 9th or other entrance years (it's tougher to tell for non-entrance years until February or March when parents don't send those renewal forms in). Mostly this first one is available, but not what follows: (2) what percent of openings generally go to siblings, which is probably fairly constant from year to year (3) what percent of openings generally go to minorities (actually, you might be able to figure this out just by looking at the school's stats page, although I don't know the rate of minority turn downs) (4) what percent were accepted last year What do you think? In my view, this would be a great start, and it's way more than is available now. Nobody is suggesting that schools post songs not talking about individualized scores for the white boy with SSATs in the 94% percentile and travel soccer but no musical instrument. I'm pretty sure that almost any admissions officer of every school knows these basic stats off the top of his or her head. So not a waste of resources -- they just have to post these stats on the web (pretty unlikely, although it would be really useful to families) or at least mention them during the open house. The benefits: (1) families would go into this with more realistic expectations, so fewer broken hearts later (2) families would be less likely to blame themselves or their kids for a rejection, as one poster on another thread said she was tempted to do. The answer from other posters was "your a loser and it's not the school's role to help you" but I disagree with this when the schools could easily help by offering more transparency about their processes. I'm all for transparency. The way the system is run now, it's all for the schools' benefit -- to get the maximum number of applicants. What about helping the families make more informed choices? I tried to have a conversation on this on the "I'm still upset" thead, but the conversation was derailed by trolls and sock puppets. So trying again here.... |
Anonymous
| Sorry for the typos -- multitasking! |
Anonymous
|
Are those of us who apply to those elite schools part of the problem?
As OP said, these schools are doing what is best for themselves. Why should they change? |
Anonymous
In what sense to you mean this? Yes, I think lots of us are over-anxious and way too vulnerable (we're no exception, and our DC got in to a top school). But I would avoid a "blame the victim" attitude because I think a lot of the anxiety is really natural. |
Anonymous
"Natural" yes, but is it right? What do we really get for having our child in a "top school"? |
Anonymous
|
Well I'd have to agree with you there.
But I don't blame parents who get emotionally involved in the process and hype. Neighbors, classmates, and endless articles about your kid's low prospects for getting into the school of their choice -- all of this will wind up some people. I do think the lack of information from the schools themselves contributes to unrealistic expectations, and to anger/heartbreak later on. |
Anonymous
|
Victims -- good lord, get over the drama. How are people "victimized" when they voluntarily apply for admission to a selective private school and their kid doesn't get in? Those poor entitled souls... Must be quite a shock to have someone tell them "no" even when they really really want something and they know other people who have it.
## 1,3,4 are data that are readily available (at least for the more exclusive schools -- and it's not clear how much better parents whose kids didn't get in would feel if they had these numbers for less exclusive schools!). #2's the wrong question. Presumably what you want to know is how many children from new families are admitted. Sibs aren't the only insider admits -- there are legacies and the children of faculty and other employees as well. Oh and let's have those racial stats expressed in terms of the percentage of white kids in the class. It frames the issue a bit differently when you recognize that 2/3 of the kids admitted were white rather than conceptualize 30-40% of the slots as being set aside for "minority" students. |
Anonymous
Agreed. Most of the data for questions 1, 3, and 4 is pretty easy to find if you're willing to do a little investigation. As for question #2, I doubt many schools are going to answer that question as clearly as you want. I doubt many schools "set aside" slots for sibling/legacies/teachers. And those kids might get an extra look during admissions at some schools, but I really doubt there's any guarantee of admission. The number of admissions for siblings, or legacies, or teachers will vary from year to year depending on how many kids fit each group and what characteristics they bring to the table. In fact, to the extent schools "set aside" slots, I have heard some schools say they reserve slots for new families, to prevent classes from becoming overloaded by siblings/legacies/teachers. |
Anonymous
| Sure, it would be interesting to me. But it wouldn't change my behavior, and it's not going to happen, so I don't spend time worrying about it. |
Anonymous
|
I think that schools owe us a lot more openness about what they do. Schools that get federal $ need to justify many of their decisions, including on admissions. But private schools in this area seem to be a law into themselves (and my kid got into one of the top two).
I totally disagree that it's all really obvious already. When our family started into it we understood NOTHING about how decisions are made - and lucked out. We only get it in retrospect after talking with other families (and through DCUM...). So all this opposition to shedding a little light on the schools strikes me as a clique trying to preserve mystery around itself.... |
Anonymous
|
Again, what's the mystery? When hundreds of kids apply for a couple of dozen slots, the vast majority of applicants won't get in. Your odds are significantly better if you already have a connection to the school (e.g. send another kid there, work there, went there yourself). From year to year, which new families get in can be fluky because these schools are looking to put together a racially diverse class with a fairly even gender balance and they pay attention to things like birth dates and personalities. Since you can't predict what mix of those factors will be represented in any given year's sib/legacy/staff kid pool, your own kid's demographics can really help or hurt you depending on the year and the particular school, especially when you're looking at PreK and K where the number of spots is quite limited and where the kids themselves don't exactly have academic records.
As the applicants get older and as classes get bigger (e.g. in preK the class of 2016 might be 24 kids -- by 9th grade, it's probably closer to 124 kids), credentials matter more because the insiders are already in and some kids who might have been or have appeared to have been capable of handling the work at the beginning of elementary school, no longer look competitive. Also, parents get more realistic about their kids's strengths and weakness and what kind of environment brings out the best in them. Kids also start to have more of a say in school choice. At which point, most people finally realize that there's no longer one right (or 3 right) answer(s) to the "what's the best school? question and they stop obsessing about odds and start looking at fit. Until 11th grade when they start thinking about college and the whole process begins anew! |
Anonymous
I don't understand your accusatory and judgmental tone. I haven't seen anyone here trying to preserve mystery or expressing opposition to exchange of information. I'm not sure why you think anyone's trying to hide anything from you. OP's question was about admission stats. I've seen several articles and websites with them, and I know for a fact they're in your local bookstore in the Georgia Irving book. In addition, if you just ask at the next open house or call up the admissions offices, I'm sure you can get all the info you need. I'm not sure what you're expecting. Are you wanting someone else here to do your homework for you? Are you trying to get us all to agree that private schools should somehow be forced to post all sorts of detailed internal admissions data on their websites? I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here. |
Anonymous
| PP - thank you and good post. As for some of the other posters - I'm feeling like you don't get the whole private school thing at all. For one, the 'we're entitled to xyz" is just crazy - it's private school and it's competitive and it would make no sense in the world for these schools to further subject themselves to the scrutiny of parents who are out of their minds trying to get their kids in. |
Anonymous
|
I did see Georgia Irwin's book at Trover last week, and it had Sidwell's tuition at $20 K. In other words, it's not updated very often. But at least by mentioning it you would seem to agree that families should have some sort of info.
But I'm out of here. Talking to you and your sock puppets is a waste of time. I know you'll deny it, but the tone and style are virtually identical, plus the times of the posts are so close. I am curious why you're so defensive, though. Do you work for a school, or do your own consulting? Cue the sock puppets.... |
Anonymous
|
I wrote 21:39 and I didn't write 21:44.
I send my kid to a private school. I don't work in admissions and never have in any form. I've never read Georgia Irving/Irwin's book. Even though I went to public school and grew up far from DC, I didn't find the local private school admissions process particularly mysterious. Through committee work and through friends, I've subsequently learned more about that process than I knew before we applied. So I've shared what I know. Take it or leave it. But sheesh enough with the sock puppet accusations already. It's pretty ridiculous to assume that everyone disagreeing with you must be the same person. |