Reply to Sidwell college advisor leaves

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Sidwell college advisor leaves"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
Seems schools like Sidwell wants it both ways. They want to feed kids into competitive programs but limited by recruiting kids not necessarily geared or prepared for those programs. Recruiting kids are from certain privileged backgrounds definitely requires sacrificing kids who are better prepared academically...just my 2cents.[/quote]

Why do you assume "recruited kids" are of lesser academic ability? Not my experience at all.[/quote]

Because when you consider constraints of legacy, donors, influential parents, siblings, sports the admission seizes to be a meritorcracy, it will have to let less prepared kids slip in and possibly more than the admission committe would if it were a meritocracy.[/quote]

I don't consider most on your list to be recruited. but YMMV.[/quote]

Does admitted work better? I once heard people argue on semantics when they don’t have a point to make.[/quote]

Admitted is not the same as recruited. Please refer to a dictionary before castigating others for your poor word choice.[/quote]

Well if you felt castigated then it was for your inability to comprehend and argue on semantics rather than substance.
[/quote]

Ok, so let's argue reality. The school factors in Quakers, alumni, siblings and children of faculty and staff into the process. They could likely fill most of the lower school with just those applicants, the way other schools already do. But Sidwell doesn't do that. They spare about half the slots for those buckets while keeping about half the slots for families new to the school. That means for new families, you have about a 1/10 chance for a spot, but for the others, you have about a 1/3 or 1/4 chance. That doesn't water down the pool, because the children that don't meet basic testing or other requirements won't be a fit to begin with. You are making an assumption that the siblings or alumni kids or athletes (which isn't a stated priority) are somehow lesser applicants. They aren't, but they are considered within their smaller aggregate pool than the general public applying. There are plenty of alumni kids, siblings and Quakers turned away because there just isn't enough room on the campus for everyone who would like to come.

But these people are not "recruited" as you wrongly termed and they are also not watering down the quality of students at the school, as you suggest without evidence. I will submit that it is harder to know much about a prospective student when they are 4 as when they are 12 or 14. As such, there is attrition of kids admitted in younger years as they seek a better fit, just like those 12 and 14 year olds are applying into 7th or 9th grades because they feel they are a good fit for the middle or high school.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics