
very original pp (not) |
Instead of "trusting" and resorting to pathetic ad hominem attacks on the pp, how about using your brain to analyze the table? And by the way, I am an expert -- I have a MS in econometrics --- but you don't need much expertise to conclude that the choice of colleges in the WSJ sample (Pomona College is counted as a top college but Yale, Columbia, Stanford and, in fact, most of the colleges of interest to people on this thread are not) is arbitrary, making the comparisons you are making meaningless. |
It is essential to consider Ivy legacy status in looking at admissions. NCS, STA, Sidwell, and probably GDS all have large numbers of parents who attended Ivy League universities and they collect that information as part of the admissions process. It would be interesting if these schools provided legacy data along with their matriculation statistics, but I don't think that will happen. |
Agreed, it would be nice to see that information. It would also be nice to see the basic characteristics of every student who was accepted at each particular school (legacy, outstanding athlete, politically connected family, math genius kid, etc), but it's just not going to happen. And if even if I had access to that information, it would be difficult to summarize in meaningful, useful ways (though I'm sure it could be done somehow). The public does have access to a certain amount of information and I've tried to summarize that usefully. One certainly has to be careful when interpreting such statistics, but in the final analysis, I do believe that sufficiently large differences in matriculation results do mean something. You'll have to decide what you believe that something is in any specific situation. |
I would like to commend you on your website; I have never seen this information aggregated anywhere else, ever. How soon do you anticipate having DC private-school data available? Another thread had "top 25 college" matriculation data for NCS (68% of the graduating class), St. Albans (59%), Holton-Arms (49%), and Landon (26%), but we can't find anything for Sidwell, Potomac School, GDS, Maret, etc. I agree that the Wall Street Journal survey was arbitrary and somewhat of a joke, given its sample selection. Far better to use (as you do on your web site) Top 25 as defined by US News or Ivy+Stanford+MIT. I'm digressing, but to what do you attribute the astronomically high (40%+) Ivy matriculation percentiles of Trinity and Collegiate in NYC? Are these exceptional kids or progeny of rich Wall Streeters who might endow an Ivy building? |
Thanks for the compliment. I'm anticipating some DC private school data to start appearing within a week. After that, it will trickle on the same way that I've been adding boarding schools, one or two a day (sometimes none). I do have a full-time job and this is just a hobby. So far, I've been able to find useable data for NCS, Holton-Arms, Landon, Potomac (maybe). Sidwell, St. Alban's, GDS and Maret did not make available the information I need to do my analysis. As I said earlier, unless some insider wants to help me out, there's little I can do. Note that my definition of a "top school" is somewhat different from the "top 25 college" matriculation data that you are citing. Well, here in NYC we're just smarter than everybody everywhere else! Isn't it obvious? ![]() Seriously, I've been wondering that myself. My older son is about to hear from several schools which figure prominently on the NYC list and we certainly will never be in a position to endow an Ivy building (and I hope both my sons attend an Ivy - preferably my alma mater one day). I suspect that the success of the top NYC schools has something to do with the population of NYC. A greater applicant pool means they can be a bit more selective at the top schools, but there are probably a number of other factors at play that I don't completely understand. It's interesting to note that of the top 5 NYC schools on that list, all but Trinity are small, single sex schools. Also, I've found at least one other day school in another city that has results in their range. You'll have to check http://www.matriculationstats.orgin a week or so to find out. |
NCS has the class of 2009 data on it's website. This should be a link to the school publications.
https://www.ncs.cathedral.org/podium/default.aspx?t=132807 You have to find the Fall 2009 Magazine (listed under school publications) which has been scanned. Go to p. 31 for the complete class of 2009 matriculation list. For anyone interested on the following page (32) there is a list of nationally recognized scholars (ie National Merit Semifinalists & scholars, National Achievement Finalists & Gates Scholar et al.) FYI. There were 7 National merit semi-finalists and 2 finalists out of the class of 78 (which for the person who was tallying these data for other schools would count as 9 semis). As for matriculation, looks like it was a decent year, but not as strong as others in the past five years based on the other data the school has provided elsewhere on their website. As you know, different classes yield different outcomes. I find it very unfortunate that people don't mind when scholarly recognition and college matriculation lists (or lists providing the top 10 colleges from x school) are posted about other schools, but find it obnoxious when someone posts pure raw data provided by NCS be it for the last five years or just the class of 2009. These are the facts. Period. So all the haters go a head and tear it a part, manipulate it to exploit weakness... I think there are 15 students who went to Ivys & Stanford... no doubt haters will write off every acceptance to UVA as being in State... I cheer for all the schools on this board and want the DC area to have the best schools in the USA. Let's all be great!!! BTW. Please know my rant above was NOT directed at the matriculations stats guy and just want to say to him... I think it's great what you're doing. Is your system perfect? No - we all know that's impossible. Let's face it, other than the top five you listed, standings are subjective and there is always speculation and controversy over the US News & World Report Rankings (however, whether you're a fan of the USN&WR rankings or not... they do matter). That being said, I believe you're doing your best to be accurate, fair and I appreciate your detailed explanation of how you've derived your valuations. Thank you!!! *One minor note to help the matriculation stats guy - when NCS lists "Wesleyan University" that is the same institution in Middletown CT commonly referred to as "Wesleyan College" (I noticed your website lists it as "college" but the school is officially called Wesleyan University please feel free to check the website http://www.wesleyan.edu). To make matters more confusing according to Wikipedia "Wesleyan [University], along with Amherst and Williams Colleges, is a member of the historic Little Three colleges and has long been known as one of the Little Ivies." |
Oh, thanks. Now I have to choose between using one complete year and 5 years with nearly complete data for schools with at least 4 students plus info for schools with at least 1. ![]() Just teasing. I'm always grateful to have more, rather than less, data to perform analyses. And thanks for pointing out the discrepancy about Wesleyan. I've corrected it on the listing page of background information, though I was only confused about the name, never about the identity of the school for the analysis. |
Yes, legacy is indeed an important variable in getting into the Ivy Leagues. |
For the STAT guy: since it is difficult to get information on legacy status as it relates (perhaps confounds) to Ivy league admission another variable that might control for this is the number of National Merit Finalists and AP Scholars at these schools. This type of information is more readily available and the requirements for certification less influenced by softer and murky variables such as legacy and athletic status.
|
I know that legacy plays a role in college admissions, but I think many on DCUM over-estimate that role. If you think that the main reason students from top high schools are getting admitted to top colleges is because of legacy, then how do you explain the high NMSF, SAT, and AP scores from top high schools? I think the answer is that children of well-educated parents are more likely to be well-educated and test well (through some combo of nurture and nature). So certainly legacy can play some role for some kids and some schools, but I think lots of other things play bigger roles. |
Is the high entrance of TJ and STA graduates to Ivy League related to legacy status or a high proportion of AP Scholars and National Merit Semi-finalists. (STA has < 10 % NMF and TJ > 40%).
What role does recruited athlete (e.g, lacrosse, crew, swimming, tennis) and legacy play in the high entrance of TJ and STA graduates to Ivy league? |
Although, TJ's percentage of NM semi-finalists is exceptional, don't discount St. Albans number of National Merit-Semi-finalists. From the years 2003-2009, there were 78 National Merit Semifinalists. Assuming there are 80 seniors per grade, that would make on average the number of NMSF's 11 per year which comes out to 13.75% What some of you posters are overlooking is that one of the "intangibles" STA graduates have is that they went to STA. The boys enter as boys but graduate men. |
I know that in DC's MCPS elementary school grade (about 55 kids) there were three members of DH's Harvard CLASS (not just Harvard graduates). I assume this is not entirely a fluke. There are tons of alumni of top-tier colleges in this area, so I wouldn't put too much weight (a little, yes) on the "legacy advantage" at particular privates. |
And certainly when comparing two similar private schools, one would expect the legacy advantage to more or less cancel out. We all know and understand that there are many factors that contribute to college admissons decisions. I'm not attempting to produce any definitive answers to the question of exactly how those factors interact (though I can't help but have some thoughts on the subject). I'm merely producing some objective, observed statistics for your pleasure(?), aguish(?) or indifference. |