Anonymous wrote:I think up until a few years ago, your analysis would be correct OP: I think top students at public schools were relatively likely to do a little bit better than similarly situated peers at private schools, particularly coming from schools like Jackson-Reed rather than Whitman. Of course there is a lot of noise. I think test optional has changed the game a little, what I noticed as we went though the last couple of cycles is that the kids from our high-end private did somewhat better than expected. In a perverse but predictable development, I think kids at private schools were in some ways seen as a safer bet because colleges can rely on grades a a bit more reliably, and better college counseling/essay coaching resources make more of a difference in a text optional world. Just another equity measure that backfired and really served the interests of the connected, the well-resourced, and those with superior skills in gaming the system. Just my opinion, of course, as one who has recently been through this process.

I’m not going to dig up the article, but there was an NYT piece a year or so ago about the backlash against test optional admissions that had data to back up your observation. Going to test optional indeed hurts minority kids, poorer kids, and others coming from public schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The same unhooked kid.
They may get in what, Georgetown Cornell perhaps Duke or Williams, in private schools. Would they get in HYP if done in public?
Why, or why not?

Public always has better stats

This take gets repeated so often on here, and ... it just doesn't hold up.

Case in point: about 10% of students in the US go to private school, but 40% of Yale undergrads come from private high schools. The Harvard Crimson had an article last year about how just 20-ish high schools (again, most of them private and highly selective) sent more than 2,000 kids to Harvard in the last 15 years.

(https://oir.yale.edu/sites/default/files/factsheet_2023-24_vf_20240328.pdf)

Not even remotely close. Kids are at a top Baltimore private and placement blows doors off of any Baltimore city, Baltimore County or Howard County public.

Anonymous wrote:Valedictorians at DCPS have their choice of Harvard, Princeton, Stanford. Not the case for many privates.

But there education was built on DCPS. What about k-11 private, than 12th grade DCPS?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The same unhooked kid.
They may get in what, Georgetown Cornell perhaps Duke or Williams, in private schools. Would they get in HYP if done in public?
Why, or why not?

Public always has better stats

Cornell is legacy driven however public’s do well here

Georgetown got money your in

Can you provide evidence for that?

When I try to estimate stats just based on what's I can find published, and what I know about individual kids, my stats don't say this at all.

My top 5% kid was admitted to a 5% selective school. Would likely had similar outcome in public. Public has much better avenues of academic exploration for a high school kid. But for us - especially with the way our kid is wired - private was invaluable. They received much more individualized attention and validation which forced them to stretch outside their comfort zone. So, we would go private again if faced with that decision. Having said that we believe each kid is different, each family is different and there is no single algorithm that works for all.

No, because my top 20% (probably top 10%) kid isn’t aiming for a T10 college and just wants a good fit, which includes supports for learning differences and visual/performing arts opportunities for kids in a stem major. We are one of those families who are in private HS for the benefits of private HS, not for the college outcomes, even though DCUM doesn’t believe that.

I don’t think they’d do better in just any public school. Our W school doesn’t appear to have better success rates for the top students and there is so much competition. It is really hard to set yourself apart from 100+ students with unweighted 4.0s, 1500+ test scores and loads of APs. There also is less help from the school counselor.

Anonymous wrote:The same unhooked kid.
They may get in what, Georgetown Cornell perhaps Duke or Williams, in private schools. Would they get in HYP if done in public?
Why, or why not?

No. Stats prove why that is why.

Valedictorians at DCPS have their choice of Harvard, Princeton, Stanford. Not the case for many privates.

I believe the names of schools like Sidwell, GDS, STA, and NCS have strong value in college admissions. My child was in about the top 20% of the class and was accepted to two Ivy League schools and another university in the top 20. Friends whose children had similar grades and high scores in public schools did not have the same results. A few were accepted to top 30 schools, but many were not. Those who got in usually had very impressive activities outside of school. My child did not have those kinds of extracurriculars.

But to have a good chance, I think you must be in the top 20% at these top private schools. If your child is not hooked and doesn’t want a small liberal arts college, then the results are much worse below that level. I know several families who were very disappointed with where their children were admitted. Getting into the top 20% of the class is not easy—it needs hard work and also some luck. Some students end up with teachers who just do not give A grades, and then they're kind of screwed.

Also, many of the top college results at these schools go to students who are hooked—athletes, legacies, minorities, or children of VIPs. And there are other situations too. Parents call in favors with friends in admissions or on the board, or they simply make big donations. I know about a dozen families in my child’s year who used some kind of favor to help children who were not in the top 20%. Ivy League schools don't seem to do this, but many of the other top 20 schools and those below definitely do. What you see on the Instagrams is rarely the full story.

I think up until a few years ago, your analysis would be correct OP: I think top students at public schools were relatively likely to do a little bit better than similarly situated peers at private schools, particularly coming from schools like Jackson-Reed rather than Whitman. Of course there is a lot of noise. I think test optional has changed the game a little, what I noticed as we went though the last couple of cycles is that the kids from our high-end private did somewhat better than expected. In a perverse but predictable development, I think kids at private schools were in some ways seen as a safer bet because colleges can rely on grades a a bit more reliably, and better college counseling/essay coaching resources make more of a difference in a text optional world. Just another equity measure that backfired and really served the interests of the connected, the well-resourced, and those with superior skills in gaming the system. Just my opinion, of course, as one who has recently been through this process.

Our private school had better placements at all %isle ranks than public school.

Anonymous wrote:The same unhooked kid.
They may get in what, Georgetown Cornell perhaps Duke or Williams, in private schools. Would they get in HYP if done in public?
Why, or why not?

Public always has better stats

Cornell is legacy driven however public’s do well here

Georgetown got money your in

The same unhooked kid.
They may get in what, Georgetown Cornell perhaps Duke or Williams, in private schools. Would they get in HYP if done in public?
Why, or why not?