Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

There aren't really more rigorous schools across the country. There is an upper echelon of private schools; Sidwell is included in that cohort.

Maybe in humanities. Sidewall doesn't hold a candle to a STEM magnet.

And a STEM magnet doesn’t hold a candle to Sidwell in humanities or campus facilities and resources.

And Sidwell still sends graduates to MIT.

Anonymous wrote:tossed into the trashcan

IMO this represents the worst of what's wrong with parents today.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

There aren't really more rigorous schools across the country. There is an upper echelon of private schools; Sidwell is included in that cohort.

Maybe in humanities. Sidewall doesn't hold a candle to a STEM magnet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

There aren't really more rigorous schools across the country. There is an upper echelon of private schools; Sidwell is included in that cohort.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

Yeah, I think the issue here is that very bright kids at these schools get a 3.5 GPA. However, even though DCUM talks non-stop about how hard they are, there are certainly kids smart enough to get a 3.9-4.0 GPA there. There are kids that do it every year.

When Ivies are only admitting <3 students per school, they are going to take the top GPAs, URM, Legacy, VIP/Donor applicants. The typical big law child with a 3.6 GPA/1500+ SAT will be tossed into the trashcan. They don't fit any institutional priority or aren't the among top students in their class.

I've had 3 kids at these schools and in my experience the kids who do really well (3.85 and above) are both bright and the types that never, ever slack off. The way these schools work---no retakes, no late work, etc really favors the kids who can just grind without mistakes: they don't ever miss a homework assignment, study less than is required, sleep through a lecture, etc (never for 4 years---pretty unusual for high schoolers).

I have one of these kids and she probably performs above her pay grade. Meaning she's very smart but more than that--she's just the most diligent person I know. There are probably classmates who are smarter but they will never out-work her. I have two other kids who do not have her drive or perseverance. They don't do as well.

I'm this poster again. I will also agree with a previous poster that there is no such "Ivy level" GPA standard at these schools. Not at all. Many of the top kids were shut out while kids with lower GPAs got in. So you need to rid yourself of that notion up front.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

Yeah, I think the issue here is that very bright kids at these schools get a 3.5 GPA. However, even though DCUM talks non-stop about how hard they are, there are certainly kids smart enough to get a 3.9-4.0 GPA there. There are kids that do it every year.

When Ivies are only admitting <3 students per school, they are going to take the top GPAs, URM, Legacy, VIP/Donor applicants. The typical big law child with a 3.6 GPA/1500+ SAT will be tossed into the trashcan. They don't fit any institutional priority or aren't the among top students in their class.

I've had 3 kids at these schools and in my experience the kids who do really well (3.85 and above) are both bright and the types that never, ever slack off. The way these schools work---no retakes, no late work, etc really favors the kids who can just grind without mistakes: they don't ever miss a homework assignment, study less than is required, sleep through a lecture, etc (never for 4 years---pretty unusual for high schoolers).

I have one of these kids and she probably performs above her pay grade. Meaning she's very smart but more than that--she's just the most diligent person I know. There are probably classmates who are smarter but they will never out-work her. I have two other kids who do not have her drive or perseverance. They don't do as well.

Know kids at both and have kids at one. Honestly seems hard to know. First, somewhat depends on what teachers you land (somewhat luck of the draw as some just don’t give As) and what rigor you pick. And even still hard to compare across different high schools/different students like that.

What is much more knowable/accurate is that there really isn’t such thing as an Ivy-worth GPA at these schools anymore. Search through the threads and you’ll read that the top students that are unhooked are basically not getting into Ivies and those slightly lower down with hooks are. Where it will be in 5 years when your kid applies to college is anyone’s guess. So if it were me, I wouldn’t try to game it like that in such an unknowable environment and one that’s not favoring unhooked too students (for Ivies - they do great). Go where your kid feels most comfortable (or gets in).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

Yeah, I think the issue here is that very bright kids at these schools get a 3.5 GPA. However, even though DCUM talks non-stop about how hard they are, there are certainly kids smart enough to get a 3.9-4.0 GPA there. There are kids that do it every year.

When Ivies are only admitting <3 students per school, they are going to take the top GPAs, URM, Legacy, VIP/Donor applicants. The typical big law child with a 3.6 GPA/1500+ SAT will be tossed into the trashcan. They don't fit any institutional priority or aren't the among top students in their class.

Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

Yeah, I think the issue here is that very bright kids at these schools get a 3.5 GPA. However, even though DCUM talks non-stop about how hard they are, there are certainly kids smart enough to get a 3.9-4.0 GPA there. There are kids that do it every year.

When Ivies are only admitting <3 students per school, they are going to take the top GPAs, URM, Legacy, VIP/Donor applicants. The typical big law child with a 3.6 GPA/1500+ SAT will be tossed into the trashcan. They don't fit any institutional priority or aren't the among top students in their class.

[img]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

There’s a difference between a 3.8 GPA and a 3.5 GPA. FWIW, Saint Ann’s in Brooklyn doesn’t even give formal grades, but its alumni go on to the most prestigious colleges in the country. Colleges know about the academic rigor involved at these schools.

And what ultimately matters is whether the kids have hooks. It’s just the reality.

Anonymous wrote:Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Lol wishful thinking. Why would a college take a 3.5 from either of these school when they can take someone who gets 4.0 of higher from the same school or one of the numbers similar or more rigorous private and public schools throughout the country?

Both schools are hard. Your child is very unlikely to get into an Ivy from either of them without hooks.

Very difficult to get 3.9 at either school

Colleges know the academic rigor involved at both schools, so getting less than a 3.9 may not be a dealbreaker. What it really comes down to is whether your kid prefers a progressive approach or a traditional one.

Is there an academic difference between either school? It seems like GDS is easier to graduate from with an Ivy-worthy GPA than Sidwell. I'm not insulting GDS, nor am I trolling. My kid is applying to both of these schools and is an athlete the coaches are interested in.

If we are shooting for a 3.9+ GPA, would GDS be a better fit? I think he like Sidwell's facilities and culture better, but GDS may be an easier journey for someone looking to get stellar grades.

What does this forum think?