Sidwell College Admissions This Year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a Sidwell parent. My kids go to a different private school. We were less than impressed by our college counseling as well. In hindsight I realize what someone else already mentioned. The school college counselors don’t really care about your individual kid. They are trying to get the best results for the school. What they want sometimes works in your favor and sometimes against it. Advice for future parents - Do your own research. Hire a private counselor who is your kid’s advocate. Listen to your school counselor but keep in mind that sometimes you need to ignore their advice. No one cares about your kids applications as much as you and your kid.

Private counselors are not calling colleges on your kids behalf. As such, what do you mean by the bolded?

I agree that private counselors are not calling colleges on your behalf. I mean they will help you make a list that is 100% focused on what is best for your child. They won’t discourage your kid from applying to a particular school because it is the first choice of a VIP’s kid.

Is this what happens at Sidwell? CCOs discourage very qualified students from applying to particular schools to avoid interfering with VIP's kids? This is shameful...

This doesn't happen at Sidwell. Nobody is stopped from applying to any school.

Ah, but since parents or students do not see the profile CCO sends to colleges, do we know who (as in VIP or big donor kids) they actually steer toward top colleges? Sunlight, Sidwell, sunlight!

Please explain to me how it is any of your business what school(s) the CCO steers other people's kids to?

How difficult would it be for Sidwell to share a college profile like this profile of a recent Exeter class with parents and students?

https://exeter.edu/sites/default/files/documents/PEA-CCO-Profile-2020-21.pdf

Or this from Andover

https://www.andover.edu/files/CCOProfileBrochure2018-2019.pdf

I’m sure Sidwell CCO produces these for college AOs, but why not share this with the student and parent community?

This Andover one, with the grade distribution, is very helpful and informative IMO. Sidwell does produce a profile for college AOs (all schools do), though who knows what info it includes? I agree with you that they should share it with the student and parent community. Sadly, it's not going to happen.

It includes the same information,. They just don't make it public

[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:

Anonymous wrote:This is a hard message to deliver and I apologize in advance. A 3.7 just isn’t all that compelling and neither is a 34 ACT relatively speaking for top 15 universities even coming from a great school like Sidwell. If your kid isn’t a NMF and/or Presidential Scholar candidate and done some substantive internships or academic research outside of school, and hit > 3.9 overall GPA having taken the Math I — Math IV sequence plus all the accelerated 1A sciences plus four years of language, plus a >1560 SAT or 35/36 ACT, you really don’t get on the radar screen of the top 15 schools. Exception is the hooked kids — namely athletes, legacies and URM, but a couple of those hooked kids have the former qualifications, too, making them spectacularly attractive applicants. These schools really know Sidwell and for example understand that a solid A from Math III is a pretty powerful academic signal. I just cannot sit by and continue to watch the Sidwell CCO get trashed the way it is by some folks on this forum. In the aggregate, they are doing a good job in a very challenging and competitive environment. The reality is, putting aside the “branding” element, the top 30 - 50 schools offer a great education. Sidwell parent of senior.

To the extent the above is at least partially true, it illustrates what has gone wrong with Sidwell over the years:

Offer a few very difficult (advanced) which are pretty harshly graded. Students who don't take these can't claim to have taken the most difficult classes. Those that do face harsh grading distributions and lower GPAs. Bad outcomes either way.

By contrast many other schools offer advanced courses that are perhaps slightly less tough than Sidwell's toughest classes, but are also graded much better (look at the course grading profiles from Westlake etc posted upthread). This allows the students at these schools to take the more advanced classes (and claim to have done so) and do well on them. Hard courses plus grade deflation favors the very very top (perhaps 5 students each grade) and hurts the top 10-25 percent of the class. If the objective is to provide the opportunity for a super high level education, that works. For better admissions outcomes it is a total fail.

--Senior Parent

Not everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

Thanks, STEM mom, good to see you again. Nothing that pp said suggests otherwise.

Huh? Answering a complaint about grading in the most rigorous math class does not make a person a stem mom. There is a reason for different levels of coursework. Not everyone is at the same place or ability in math or science or history or whatever. It is fine for there to be very challenging coursework in different diciplines and also less challenging options

Not everyone is at the same place in reading comprehension either, apparently.

Just because I think challenging courses and challenging grading is advantageous instead of disadvantageous does not mean I can't read. I just have a different opinion.

No one wrote or suggested that everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

There is a poster that would like less rigorous grading in the most challenging courses so more students can receive higher grades. I don't agree with this strategy.

Then calculate weighted GPA that is fair for every student

There is a GPA bump for taking advanced sciences and Maths.

No. All Sidwell GPA is unweighted.

Not true. When your kid is in one of these classes, they are given specifics about the weighted bump.

Very clearly you are not Sidwell parent. Or you DC get special treatment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a Sidwell parent. My kids go to a different private school. We were less than impressed by our college counseling as well. In hindsight I realize what someone else already mentioned. The school college counselors don’t really care about your individual kid. They are trying to get the best results for the school. What they want sometimes works in your favor and sometimes against it. Advice for future parents - Do your own research. Hire a private counselor who is your kid’s advocate. Listen to your school counselor but keep in mind that sometimes you need to ignore their advice. No one cares about your kids applications as much as you and your kid.

Private counselors are not calling colleges on your kids behalf. As such, what do you mean by the bolded?

I agree that private counselors are not calling colleges on your behalf. I mean they will help you make a list that is 100% focused on what is best for your child. They won’t discourage your kid from applying to a particular school because it is the first choice of a VIP’s kid.

Is this what happens at Sidwell? CCOs discourage very qualified students from applying to particular schools to avoid interfering with VIP's kids? This is shameful...

This doesn't happen at Sidwell. Nobody is stopped from applying to any school.

Ah, but since parents or students do not see the profile CCO sends to colleges, do we know who (as in VIP or big donor kids) they actually steer toward top colleges? Sunlight, Sidwell, sunlight!

Please explain to me how it is any of your business what school(s) the CCO steers other people's kids to?

How difficult would it be for Sidwell to share a college profile like this profile of a recent Exeter class with parents and students?

https://exeter.edu/sites/default/files/documents/PEA-CCO-Profile-2020-21.pdf

Or this from Andover

https://www.andover.edu/files/CCOProfileBrochure2018-2019.pdf

I’m sure Sidwell CCO produces these for college AOs, but why not share this with the student and parent community?

This Andover one, with the grade distribution, is very helpful and informative IMO. Sidwell does produce a profile for college AOs (all schools do), though who knows what info it includes? I agree with you that they should share it with the student and parent community. Sadly, it's not going to happen.

It includes the same information,. They just don't make it public

You don't know that. As we have seen from the examples on this thread, high school profiles vary significantly from school to school.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:This is a hard message to deliver and I apologize in advance. A 3.7 just isn’t all that compelling and neither is a 34 ACT relatively speaking for top 15 universities even coming from a great school like Sidwell. If your kid isn’t a NMF and/or Presidential Scholar candidate and done some substantive internships or academic research outside of school, and hit > 3.9 overall GPA having taken the Math I — Math IV sequence plus all the accelerated 1A sciences plus four years of language, plus a >1560 SAT or 35/36 ACT, you really don’t get on the radar screen of the top 15 schools. Exception is the hooked kids — namely athletes, legacies and URM, but a couple of those hooked kids have the former qualifications, too, making them spectacularly attractive applicants. These schools really know Sidwell and for example understand that a solid A from Math III is a pretty powerful academic signal. I just cannot sit by and continue to watch the Sidwell CCO get trashed the way it is by some folks on this forum. In the aggregate, they are doing a good job in a very challenging and competitive environment. The reality is, putting aside the “branding” element, the top 30 - 50 schools offer a great education. Sidwell parent of senior.

To the extent the above is at least partially true, it illustrates what has gone wrong with Sidwell over the years:

Offer a few very difficult (advanced) which are pretty harshly graded. Students who don't take these can't claim to have taken the most difficult classes. Those that do face harsh grading distributions and lower GPAs. Bad outcomes either way.

By contrast many other schools offer advanced courses that are perhaps slightly less tough than Sidwell's toughest classes, but are also graded much better (look at the course grading profiles from Westlake etc posted upthread). This allows the students at these schools to take the more advanced classes (and claim to have done so) and do well on them. Hard courses plus grade deflation favors the very very top (perhaps 5 students each grade) and hurts the top 10-25 percent of the class. If the objective is to provide the opportunity for a super high level education, that works. For better admissions outcomes it is a total fail.

--Senior Parent

Not everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

Thanks, STEM mom, good to see you again. Nothing that pp said suggests otherwise.

Huh? Answering a complaint about grading in the most rigorous math class does not make a person a stem mom. There is a reason for different levels of coursework. Not everyone is at the same place or ability in math or science or history or whatever. It is fine for there to be very challenging coursework in different diciplines and also less challenging options

Not everyone is at the same place in reading comprehension either, apparently.

Just because I think challenging courses and challenging grading is advantageous instead of disadvantageous does not mean I can't read. I just have a different opinion.

No one wrote or suggested that everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

There is a poster that would like less rigorous grading in the most challenging courses so more students can receive higher grades. I don't agree with this strategy.

Then calculate weighted GPA that is fair for every student

There is a GPA bump for taking advanced sciences and Maths.

No. All Sidwell GPA is unweighted.

Not true. When your kid is in one of these classes, they are given specifics about the weighted bump.

False. My kids took those classes. So much misinformation on this thread.

[Anonymous]

I am a about to sound like a terrible person, but there are 2 schools on the Sidwell Instagram that they absolutely did NOT need to go to Sidwell to get into. One of the schools is one that I am familiar with, and it is so obscure I don’t think I have ever seen it mentioned on here before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a about to sound like a terrible person, but there are 2 schools on the Sidwell Instagram that they absolutely did NOT need to go to Sidwell to get into. One of the schools is one that I am familiar with, and it is so obscure I don’t think I have ever seen it mentioned on here before.

SOUND like a terrible person?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:This is a hard message to deliver and I apologize in advance. A 3.7 just isn’t all that compelling and neither is a 34 ACT relatively speaking for top 15 universities even coming from a great school like Sidwell. If your kid isn’t a NMF and/or Presidential Scholar candidate and done some substantive internships or academic research outside of school, and hit > 3.9 overall GPA having taken the Math I — Math IV sequence plus all the accelerated 1A sciences plus four years of language, plus a >1560 SAT or 35/36 ACT, you really don’t get on the radar screen of the top 15 schools. Exception is the hooked kids — namely athletes, legacies and URM, but a couple of those hooked kids have the former qualifications, too, making them spectacularly attractive applicants. These schools really know Sidwell and for example understand that a solid A from Math III is a pretty powerful academic signal. I just cannot sit by and continue to watch the Sidwell CCO get trashed the way it is by some folks on this forum. In the aggregate, they are doing a good job in a very challenging and competitive environment. The reality is, putting aside the “branding” element, the top 30 - 50 schools offer a great education. Sidwell parent of senior.

To the extent the above is at least partially true, it illustrates what has gone wrong with Sidwell over the years:

Offer a few very difficult (advanced) which are pretty harshly graded. Students who don't take these can't claim to have taken the most difficult classes. Those that do face harsh grading distributions and lower GPAs. Bad outcomes either way.

By contrast many other schools offer advanced courses that are perhaps slightly less tough than Sidwell's toughest classes, but are also graded much better (look at the course grading profiles from Westlake etc posted upthread). This allows the students at these schools to take the more advanced classes (and claim to have done so) and do well on them. Hard courses plus grade deflation favors the very very top (perhaps 5 students each grade) and hurts the top 10-25 percent of the class. If the objective is to provide the opportunity for a super high level education, that works. For better admissions outcomes it is a total fail.

--Senior Parent

Not everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

Thanks, STEM mom, good to see you again. Nothing that pp said suggests otherwise.

Huh? Answering a complaint about grading in the most rigorous math class does not make a person a stem mom. There is a reason for different levels of coursework. Not everyone is at the same place or ability in math or science or history or whatever. It is fine for there to be very challenging coursework in different diciplines and also less challenging options

Not everyone is at the same place in reading comprehension either, apparently.

Just because I think challenging courses and challenging grading is advantageous instead of disadvantageous does not mean I can't read. I just have a different opinion.

No one wrote or suggested that everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

There is a poster that would like less rigorous grading in the most challenging courses so more students can receive higher grades. I don't agree with this strategy.

Then calculate weighted GPA that is fair for every student

There is a GPA bump for taking advanced sciences and Maths.

No. All Sidwell GPA is unweighted.

Not true. When your kid is in one of these classes, they are given specifics about the weighted bump.

What are you talking about? I have never heard of any weight bump for these classes, only that the CCO tells colleges which courses are considered the most rigorous.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a hard message to deliver and I apologize in advance. A 3.7 just isn’t all that compelling and neither is a 34 ACT relatively speaking for top 15 universities even coming from a great school like Sidwell. If your kid isn’t a NMF and/or Presidential Scholar candidate and done some substantive internships or academic research outside of school, and hit > 3.9 overall GPA having taken the Math I — Math IV sequence plus all the accelerated 1A sciences plus four years of language, plus a >1560 SAT or 35/36 ACT, you really don’t get on the radar screen of the top 15 schools. Exception is the hooked kids — namely athletes, legacies and URM, but a couple of those hooked kids have the former qualifications, too, making them spectacularly attractive applicants. These schools really know Sidwell and for example understand that a solid A from Math III is a pretty powerful academic signal. I just cannot sit by and continue to watch the Sidwell CCO get trashed the way it is by some folks on this forum. In the aggregate, they are doing a good job in a very challenging and competitive environment. The reality is, putting aside the “branding” element, the top 30 - 50 schools offer a great education. Sidwell parent of senior.

To the extent the above is at least partially true, it illustrates what has gone wrong with Sidwell over the years:

Offer a few very difficult (advanced) which are pretty harshly graded. Students who don't take these can't claim to have taken the most difficult classes. Those that do face harsh grading distributions and lower GPAs. Bad outcomes either way.

By contrast many other schools offer advanced courses that are perhaps slightly less tough than Sidwell's toughest classes, but are also graded much better (look at the course grading profiles from Westlake etc posted upthread). This allows the students at these schools to take the more advanced classes (and claim to have done so) and do well on them. Hard courses plus grade deflation favors the very very top (perhaps 5 students each grade) and hurts the top 10-25 percent of the class. If the objective is to provide the opportunity for a super high level education, that works. For better admissions outcomes it is a total fail.

--Senior Parent

Not everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

Thanks, STEM mom, good to see you again. Nothing that pp said suggests otherwise.

Huh? Answering a complaint about grading in the most rigorous math class does not make a person a stem mom. There is a reason for different levels of coursework. Not everyone is at the same place or ability in math or science or history or whatever. It is fine for there to be very challenging coursework in different diciplines and also less challenging options

Not everyone is at the same place in reading comprehension either, apparently.

Just because I think challenging courses and challenging grading is advantageous instead of disadvantageous does not mean I can't read. I just have a different opinion.

No one wrote or suggested that everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

There is a poster that would like less rigorous grading in the most challenging courses so more students can receive higher grades. I don't agree with this strategy.

Then calculate weighted GPA that is fair for every student

There is a GPA bump for taking advanced sciences and Maths.

No. All Sidwell GPA is unweighted.

Not true. When your kid is in one of these classes, they are given specifics about the weighted bump.

What are you talking about? I have never heard of any weight bump for these classes, only that the CCO tells colleges which courses are considered the most rigorous.

+1. Can we PLEASE get to 75 pages and 50,000 views on this thread?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a about to sound like a terrible person, but there are 2 schools on the Sidwell Instagram that they absolutely did NOT need to go to Sidwell to get into. One of the schools is one that I am familiar with, and it is so obscure I don’t think I have ever seen it mentioned on here before.

Clearly it's difficult for others to see evidence that not all Sidwell families send their kids there just because it will result in HYPSM.

And clearly, this is another biased DCUM post that only deems a small set of colleges to be "worthy".

I'll just assume that the kids that have posted their school choices are excited about finding a great match.

Why would you post this, especially knowing it sounds bad? It felt that way because it was obnoxious on every dimension.

[Anonymous]

Truly inappropriate to discuss individual students / college choices. Just don’t go there please. It’s a bit creepy to know middle aged adults are scrutinizing and then commenting on the IG page with 18 year olds on it. Restrain yourself.

[Anonymous]

https://mbhs.edu/departments/magnet/ParentResources/MagnetProfile.pdf


Here is a Maryland high school example of senior class profile. Granular, clear, with simply the data and facts. No interpretation.

[Anonymous]

When one looks at this profile one wonders why entitled and arrogant children think someone is taking their spots at the T25. Here are 100 students (90% of the class) who are deserving and do not go to Sidwell and 40% are NMF!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a hard message to deliver and I apologize in advance. A 3.7 just isn’t all that compelling and neither is a 34 ACT relatively speaking for top 15 universities even coming from a great school like Sidwell. If your kid isn’t a NMF and/or Presidential Scholar candidate and done some substantive internships or academic research outside of school, and hit > 3.9 overall GPA having taken the Math I — Math IV sequence plus all the accelerated 1A sciences plus four years of language, plus a >1560 SAT or 35/36 ACT, you really don’t get on the radar screen of the top 15 schools. Exception is the hooked kids — namely athletes, legacies and URM, but a couple of those hooked kids have the former qualifications, too, making them spectacularly attractive applicants. These schools really know Sidwell and for example understand that a solid A from Math III is a pretty powerful academic signal. I just cannot sit by and continue to watch the Sidwell CCO get trashed the way it is by some folks on this forum. In the aggregate, they are doing a good job in a very challenging and competitive environment. The reality is, putting aside the “branding” element, the top 30 - 50 schools offer a great education. Sidwell parent of senior.

To the extent the above is at least partially true, it illustrates what has gone wrong with Sidwell over the years:

Offer a few very difficult (advanced) which are pretty harshly graded. Students who don't take these can't claim to have taken the most difficult classes. Those that do face harsh grading distributions and lower GPAs. Bad outcomes either way.

By contrast many other schools offer advanced courses that are perhaps slightly less tough than Sidwell's toughest classes, but are also graded much better (look at the course grading profiles from Westlake etc posted upthread). This allows the students at these schools to take the more advanced classes (and claim to have done so) and do well on them. Hard courses plus grade deflation favors the very very top (perhaps 5 students each grade) and hurts the top 10-25 percent of the class. If the objective is to provide the opportunity for a super high level education, that works. For better admissions outcomes it is a total fail.

--Senior Parent

Not everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

Thanks, STEM mom, good to see you again. Nothing that pp said suggests otherwise.

Huh? Answering a complaint about grading in the most rigorous math class does not make a person a stem mom. There is a reason for different levels of coursework. Not everyone is at the same place or ability in math or science or history or whatever. It is fine for there to be very challenging coursework in different diciplines and also less challenging options

Not everyone is at the same place in reading comprehension either, apparently.

Just because I think challenging courses and challenging grading is advantageous instead of disadvantageous does not mean I can't read. I just have a different opinion.

No one wrote or suggested that everyone gets bad grades in the most rigorous math and science classes.

There is a poster that would like less rigorous grading in the most challenging courses so more students can receive higher grades. I don't agree with this strategy.

Then calculate weighted GPA that is fair for every student

There is a GPA bump for taking advanced sciences and Maths.

No. All Sidwell GPA is unweighted.

Not true. When your kid is in one of these classes, they are given specifics about the weighted bump.

Very clearly you are not Sidwell parent. Or you DC get special treatment?

This isn't private information. When they send out the junior year GPA, they tell you how to calculate the "advanced' classes.

[Anonymous]

https://mbhs.edu/departments/magnet/ParentResources/College%20Letter.pdf

Here is the data companion Blair letter to colleges

[Anonymous]

https://mbhs.edu/departments/magnet/ParentResources/MagnetProfile.pdf


Here is a Maryland high school example of senior class profile. Granular, clear, with simply the data and facts. No interpretation.

Yes, this is straightforward... and impressive. The test scores and classes listed on the 2nd page (thermodynamics? quantum physics? in high school?) caught my attention.