Bias against privates high school in admissions?

[Anonymous]

Be aware that the bias may extend to "good publics" with privileged students, too. "Success stories" in "bad schools" tend to stand out more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

Public schools are a form of welfare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you really think a ton of the kids getting in are 1st gen? They are being sought because they have mire hurdles and are underrepresented. Do you get what underrepresented means? There aren't that many of them. I wish people would stop focusing on the underrepresented few. Those kids are not "beating out" some private school kid for the same spot. That's not how it works.

In fact, there are lots of URMs and FGLIs.

Not really. You just telegraphed that you have no experience with these schools.

We probably have a different idea of what "lots" means. Just compare test scores.

??? Compare scores with whom? And how does this relate to your assertion of "lots?" And, why are you focused on test scores? Even at schools the prefer or require them, they are not the end-all be-all. Also, what is you idea of "lots?" More than the handful that exist? How generous.

Again, you've made it clear you don't have any experience with these campuses. Stop the disinformation.

See where the low test score admits come from.

Going deep into the application pool to hit targets. It is just more DEI based discrimination.

To whom much is given, much is expected.

Actually, there is really no good excuse why you would lower admission standards for a select group.

Most selective colleges disagree with you. Wonder why that is? Wonder if you opinion matters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you really think a ton of the kids getting in are 1st gen? They are being sought because they have mire hurdles and are underrepresented. Do you get what underrepresented means? There aren't that many of them. I wish people would stop focusing on the underrepresented few. Those kids are not "beating out" some private school kid for the same spot. That's not how it works.

In fact, there are lots of URMs and FGLIs.

Not really. You just telegraphed that you have no experience with these schools.

We probably have a different idea of what "lots" means. Just compare test scores.

??? Compare scores with whom? And how does this relate to your assertion of "lots?" And, why are you focused on test scores? Even at schools the prefer or require them, they are not the end-all be-all. Also, what is you idea of "lots?" More than the handful that exist? How generous.

Again, you've made it clear you don't have any experience with these campuses. Stop the disinformation.

See where the low test score admits come from.

Going deep into the application pool to hit targets. It is just more DEI based discrimination.

To whom much is given, much is expected.

Actually, there is really no good excuse why you would lower admission standards for a select group.

Most selective colleges disagree with you. Wonder why that is? Wonder if you opinion matters?

Because the history of reverse discrimination and later DEI became trendy. It is all evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you really think a ton of the kids getting in are 1st gen? They are being sought because they have mire hurdles and are underrepresented. Do you get what underrepresented means? There aren't that many of them. I wish people would stop focusing on the underrepresented few. Those kids are not "beating out" some private school kid for the same spot. That's not how it works.

In fact, there are lots of URMs and FGLIs.

Not really. You just telegraphed that you have no experience with these schools.

We probably have a different idea of what "lots" means. Just compare test scores.

??? Compare scores with whom? And how does this relate to your assertion of "lots?" And, why are you focused on test scores? Even at schools the prefer or require them, they are not the end-all be-all. Also, what is you idea of "lots?" More than the handful that exist? How generous.

Again, you've made it clear you don't have any experience with these campuses. Stop the disinformation.

See where the low test score admits come from.

Going deep into the application pool to hit targets. It is just more DEI based discrimination.

To whom much is given, much is expected.

Actually, there is really no good excuse why you would lower admission standards for a select group.

Most selective colleges disagree with you. Wonder why that is? Wonder if you opinion matters?

Because the history of reverse discrimination and later DEI became trendy. It is all evil.

Evil? Then you should flee! You certainly don’t want to be part of an evil regime! Don’t put your child in harm’s way! Run!!

[Anonymous]

Love this thread. Shows the true colors of many private school families. They have every advantage yet bemoan alleged discrimination against their privilege. Disturbing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

That’s your choice and good for you. There’s your pat on the head. Feel better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you really think a ton of the kids getting in are 1st gen? They are being sought because they have mire hurdles and are underrepresented. Do you get what underrepresented means? There aren't that many of them. I wish people would stop focusing on the underrepresented few. Those kids are not "beating out" some private school kid for the same spot. That's not how it works.

In fact, there are lots of URMs and FGLIs.

Not really. You just telegraphed that you have no experience with these schools.

We probably have a different idea of what "lots" means. Just compare test scores.

??? Compare scores with whom? And how does this relate to your assertion of "lots?" And, why are you focused on test scores? Even at schools the prefer or require them, they are not the end-all be-all. Also, what is you idea of "lots?" More than the handful that exist? How generous.

Again, you've made it clear you don't have any experience with these campuses. Stop the disinformation.

See where the low test score admits come from.

Going deep into the application pool to hit targets. It is just more DEI based discrimination.

To whom much is given, much is expected.

Actually, there is really no good excuse why you would lower admission standards for a select group.

Most selective colleges disagree with you. Wonder why that is? Wonder if you opinion matters?

Because the history of reverse discrimination and later DEI became trendy. It is all evil.

Evil? Then you should flee! You certainly don’t want to be part of an evil regime! Don’t put your child in harm’s way! Run!!

DEI is discrimination. Changing the target group doesn’t make it right. We will look back at DEI as shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

That’s your choice and good for you. There’s your pat on the head. Feel better?

Welfare queen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m afraid to ask how you think Washington area public schools do not reflect your family’s values. Yikes. Definitely go private if that is your mindset.

Better to be a Brett Cavanaugh, amirite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

Thank you so much for your tax dollars that sent my kid to top-25. 🙏🏻

And, from the other thread I’m not going to take my free handout from you and give it my kids before I’m in the cold hard earth. 😘

[Anonymous]

We had/have the same concern. Ultimately we're going private because I don't want to navigate college admissions alone and we feel there is a definite advantage to the counseling and parent education offered at the private.

Most of the students attend LACs but some did attend UVA. None of the schools were bad and I can only assume that not all students picked the most elite college they were accepted to- they too had to weigh out aid & scholarships and all of the other factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I posted this in private schools but I think it’s maybe more relevant here)


Look I know this is an uncomfortable topic. Probably one you’ll want to deny if you have a kid in private. But could we have a frank convo about this? I have multiple friends with kids in privates who have top grades and SAT scores but don’t get into schools that their public counterparts do. Like UVA for example.

I get it-there’s a backlash against the perceived privilege of privates, but how bad is it? I keep hearing about first generation college students being what’s sought after. How true is this?

We are debating public vs private for high school. DS has been accepted to an elite private for upper school but has a great public. We see so many intangible benefits to attending the private, things like character and social skills and being more in alignment with our family values. Public has a solid education & offers great academics but lacks the focus on those things. And I have a number of friends with kids from privates that didn’t get into schools their public counterparts did. To the point that I’m being warned to go public instead!

How true is this? I get that college overall is so much harder to get into-but is there a bias against privates now in admissions?? Have you experienced this?

So public doesn't have your values? That comment alone shows how clueless you are. You think privates do?

Publics are full of people taking free handouts from taxpayers. They don’t want to pay the cost of raising their own children. They want the government to fund their kids and their decisions.

At private we fund our own kids.

Thank you so much for your tax dollars that sent my kid to top-25. 🙏🏻

And, from the other thread I’m not going to take my free handout from you and give it my kids before I’m in the cold hard earth. 😘

Glad you realize who is actually funding your children’s education in public school. The wealthy taxpayers in private school.