Sidwell throttling down college admissions?

[Anonymous]

I do tend to think that if you have a stellar student and are very concerned about top college, send them to a DC Public. They would have their pick, and have to pressure cook far less through adolescence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do tend to think that if you have a stellar student and are very concerned about top college, send them to a DC Public. They would have their pick, and have to pressure cook far less through adolescence.

It's the very top/stellar students who will benefit the most from the best possible education. They will rise to the top anywhere. It's the second and third tier that I think would do better at public school where they can still get straight As, although their standardized tests may suffer a little.

[Anonymous]

A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. It seems like the value add of being a legacy for college admissions is WAY lower than, say, for PK/K at the local privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
"The engine this year has been sputtering."

I guess I disagree. Seems like everything evened out after the regular results came in.

The Sidwell college 'engine' is a straight three, but it needs a lot more horsepower. Moreover, one of the three cylinders has seized up, doesn't work well and needs to be recalled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. It seems like the value add of being a legacy for college admissions is WAY lower than, say, for PK/K at the local privates.

value add this year was "1st in my family to ever go to college." 10%+ of admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

"They all question the system . . . the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little." Ah, the agonized cry of stymied white privilege. Yeah, it was nice in the 1980s when going to Groton or St. Paul's, with good grades and board scores and your legacy status, meant a red carpet to the Ivy League, huh?

The world is a big place and these colleges want global and national student bodies. I've always believed legacy is acceptable legally -- that the business model of institutions highly dependent on donations makes it rational, even though it gives an advantage to white, Christian students (given that many top schools discriminated against non-white and Jewish students well into the 20th century). But just because the legacy system is legal doesn't mean colleges are bound to it, if they put a priority on new talent and diversity of all types -- racial, ethnic, geographic.

Signed, White Ivy League Alum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. It seems like the value add of being a legacy for college admissions is WAY lower than, say, for PK/K at the local privates.

value add this year was "1st in my family to ever go to college." 10%+ of admits.

Very true. Will be interesting to see what this does to the business model. Previously the point of going to an Ivy was “the connections you’ll make” and if that changes to connections with international students and 1st in my family types, it’s not clear what that will mean.

[Anonymous]

Underprivileged and first-gen students are still only a very small portion of accepted students at top colleges - 10% max.
I think it is a good thing that colleges are finally making an effort to even slightly level the playing field.
The kids at our elite private school have so many advantages besides their top notch private school education - highly educated parents with influential connections, international travel, unlimited access to private tutoring for academic subjects and ACT/SAT tutoring, coaching in interviewing, essay writing tutor, access to therapists if needed. I really do think these kids should be held to a higher standard even though this puts my own children at a disadvantage too. I also want my kids to be around all kinds of students in college not just the privileged elite. Finally, while I would be over the moon if my kid is accepted into an Ivy and it is a possibility next year as he is a very good student, I also know he will be fine wherever he ends up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:value add this year was "1st in my family to ever go to college." 10%+ of admits.

How do you know this? I call BS without any proof.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

"They all question the system . . . the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little." Ah, the agonized cry of stymied white privilege. Yeah, it was nice in the 1980s when going to Groton or St. Paul's, with good grades and board scores and your legacy status, meant a red carpet to the Ivy League, huh?

The world is a big place and these colleges want global and national student bodies. I've always believed legacy is acceptable legally -- that the business model of institutions highly dependent on donations makes it rational, even though it gives an advantage to white, Christian students (given that many top schools discriminated against non-white and Jewish students well into the 20th century). But just because the legacy system is legal doesn't mean colleges are bound to it, if they put a priority on new talent and diversity of all types -- racial, ethnic, geographic.

Signed, White Ivy League Alum

No actually it was my kid who wanted MIT but got Yale + 3 other comps. System is flawed versus Int'l systems where merit (transcript, test score) is the most heavily weighted input. Many of us think that.
We are not American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. It seems like the value add of being a legacy for college admissions is WAY lower than, say, for PK/K at the local privates.

value add this year was "1st in my family to ever go to college." 10%+ of admits.

Very true. Will be interesting to see what this does to the business model. Previously the point of going to an Ivy was “the connections you’ll make” and if that changes to connections with international students and 1st in my family types, it’s not clear what that will mean.

Historically it has resulted in more handholding + more [gender, immigrant, racial] studies majors who go to work at the very feeder programs that got them in. Didn't a big article on this just come out? From 0-1% of student body to 10-15% placeholder is a BIG change, wonder if it is equitably displacing other categories or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

"They all question the system . . . the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little." Ah, the agonized cry of stymied white privilege. Yeah, it was nice in the 1980s when going to Groton or St. Paul's, with good grades and board scores and your legacy status, meant a red carpet to the Ivy League, huh?

The world is a big place and these colleges want global and national student bodies. I've always believed legacy is acceptable legally -- that the business model of institutions highly dependent on donations makes it rational, even though it gives an advantage to white, Christian students (given that many top schools discriminated against non-white and Jewish students well into the 20th century). But just because the legacy system is legal doesn't mean colleges are bound to it, if they put a priority on new talent and diversity of all types -- racial, ethnic, geographic.

Signed, White Ivy League Alum

No actually it was my kid who wanted MIT but got Yale + 3 other comps. System is flawed versus Int'l systems where merit (transcript, test score) is the most heavily weighted input. Many of us think that.
We are not American.

Not to mention fraudulent worthless grades and SAT scores. You can buy anything overseas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

"They all question the system . . . the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little." Ah, the agonized cry of stymied white privilege. Yeah, it was nice in the 1980s when going to Groton or St. Paul's, with good grades and board scores and your legacy status, meant a red carpet to the Ivy League, huh?

The world is a big place and these colleges want global and national student bodies. I've always believed legacy is acceptable legally -- that the business model of institutions highly dependent on donations makes it rational, even though it gives an advantage to white, Christian students (given that many top schools discriminated against non-white and Jewish students well into the 20th century). But just because the legacy system is legal doesn't mean colleges are bound to it, if they put a priority on new talent and diversity of all types -- racial, ethnic, geographic.

Signed, White Ivy League Alum

No actually it was my kid who wanted MIT but got Yale + 3 other comps. System is flawed versus Int'l systems where merit (transcript, test score) is the most heavily weighted input. Many of us think that.
We are not American.

Not to mention fraudulent worthless grades and SAT scores. You can buy anything overseas.

What makes you think that they (Chinese and people from other countries) would only buy SAT/ACT scores? They actually have an industry dedicated to forging everything that one needs to submit to a school from charitable activities/organizations to reference letters and essays, ...

Since it is so easy to buy everything, and to apply for so many schools, this extra tens of millions of international applicants with fraudulent materials/grades/scores/awards and experiences have tremendously decreased the admission rates of the top schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A top kid will forge their way in any environment. That is what we have found after nitpicking our K-12 acceptances a few years ago vs what our kid has accomplished to date. It's been a fun and wild ride, can't wait to see what is next.

Other kid, needs a kick in the pants to not do the minimum effort to get good grades. Honestly, perhaps if big sis wasn't who she was, maybe little sis would step up. Dad and I need to strategize on that one.... they are only 2 grades apart.

As for college admissions, NY, Boston, Palo Alto folks I meet with via work going through this college app season have all hated it. They all question the system, their private school environment, the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little.

"They all question the system . . . the socially engineered college classes, and realized that legacy means very little." Ah, the agonized cry of stymied white privilege. Yeah, it was nice in the 1980s when going to Groton or St. Paul's, with good grades and board scores and your legacy status, meant a red carpet to the Ivy League, huh?

The world is a big place and these colleges want global and national student bodies. I've always believed legacy is acceptable legally -- that the business model of institutions highly dependent on donations makes it rational, even though it gives an advantage to white, Christian students (given that many top schools discriminated against non-white and Jewish students well into the 20th century). But just because the legacy system is legal doesn't mean colleges are bound to it, if they put a priority on new talent and diversity of all types -- racial, ethnic, geographic.

Signed, White Ivy League Alum

No actually it was my kid who wanted MIT but got Yale + 3 other comps. System is flawed versus Int'l systems where merit (transcript, test score) is the most heavily weighted input. Many of us think that.
We are not American.

Not to mention fraudulent worthless grades and SAT scores. You can buy anything overseas.

What on earth are you harping about? You don’t get out much.

Oxbridge, IIT/IIM, Todai/Kyodai, any school in HK or shanghai is based in academic merit and test scores.
And none of those are fraudulent worthless grades nor care about your SAT.
Have you been to an oxford college interview? It’s an oral exam in the blackboard on your chosen A level subjects.