Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transactional LA- parents demand and get.

DC culture is more respectful of educators so you don’t know diddly

Reminds me of Caitlin Flanagan’s Atlantic article from when she worked as a college counselor at HW.

Anonymous wrote:Transactional LA- parents demand and get.

DC culture is more respectful of educators so you don’t know diddly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also a HW parent. A few things that might useful to consider:

1. HW is the only school of its type in the country that publishes this kind of data. I know of no other school that breaks out the acceptances into hooked/unhooked. This says a lot about the school, in my estimation, both in terms of how things work internally and how it presents itself publicly.

2. it is useful to compare the unhooked acceptances with published acceptances for all students, which can also be found if you look around. But generally speaking many legacy-type students are also in that top band of 3.8+, from what I can tell. Unhooked students going to Stanford or Harvard are probably just a few per year. But there are many more hooked students going, and they are typically very good students if not tiptop. Many of the Princeton kids seem to be water polo players

3. HW does not, however, publish ED vs. RD numbers, which would tell us a lot about applications to schools like Chicago and NYU. The data would be that much more useful if they did this.

4. 3.8+ equates, as best I can tell, to the top 20 percent of a class. So let's say 55-60 students.

5. Financial aid at HW is only 25 percent of families. The parents are generally well-to-do, sometimes obscenely rich (I know of parents who live in 40-60 m dollar houses). But the vast majority of parents are upper-middle-class-to-rich professionals: law, finance, medicine. Not a few film industry people, but mostly the money side, not the "talent." I don't think the "famous parent" thing is really a big deal, though of course it will seem that way relative to other cities.

6. One other thought: HW is one of many, many schools in the city, but it strikes me as the one most likely to draw from kids all over the city, as a rule, though most are from the rich west side of the city. It is also much larger than other privates, with 300 students roughly per class. It is universally recognized as the most academically intense school in the city; it is in no way seen as simply as a school for the city's elite, even if that might be the perception outside of LA.

Do you know what the “etc” means in the definition of unhooked? What students are excluded from this data, in other words.

Thanks for your insight. Your posts are interesting.

I have asked the same question. I was thinking the "etc." implies URM -- and is a polite way of saying so -- but then the unhooked data includes Howard Univ and Morehouse. So I don't know how to reconcile those two things.

Anonymous wrote:Have you guys seen this?
It's the matriculation data for unhooked kids from Harvard Westlake.
It's REALLY interesting.

https://students.hw.com/Portals/44/completehandbook2023.pdf

A couple of thoughts:
--Their GPAs seem to be a touch higher than those at DC privates. Many kids are applying with above a 3.8. Very few are applying with below a 3.4. Our DC private has almost no kids with a 3.8+

That said, the Ivies have a pretty strict GPA cut-off of about 3.8. Still lots of lower kids trying to apply without luck. I can totally see this at our private "my kid is special! they can get into an Ivy with a 3.6!!" Um. NO
Other schools like NYU, Georgetown, Tufts seem to love HW kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would hate to be a college counselor at a top private school.
Sounds very stressful dealing with neurotic and entitled parents and kids.
We are at a private school but I have to just say it - parental expectations are sky high and not always reasonable.
Many parents are high fliers in society and professionally. They are used to getting what they want. It does not always work out that way for college admissions

Sure this is right. And I am one of the GDS parents here complaining about GDS.

Here's the thing - I don't expect my kid to go to an Ivy because I did. I really don't. All I have said here (and most GDS parents I've seen post here have said) is that GDS clearly has GPA driven outcomes data but they don't share it with parents. Frankly this would unburden their office. Instead, they go with unclear and n0n-transprent communications masked in feel-good trust your heart language.

That's not me being a type A and wanting my kid to go to HYP because I did. That's me saying if GDS could show me the data and it said HYP below 3.8 has not happened for a GDS kid in the last 5 years (even athlete) then I would say to my kid, "dont apply to HYP" - instead it becomes this war of wills with the CCO simple BECUASE they dont share data and they ask us to read their tone and body language....and even worse, they ask 17 year olds to do that becuase there is a grand total of 1 meeting with parents to discuss the list.

They were also entirely unclear about AP testing despite listing AP test results of senior class in College Profile - after getting rid of AP courses.

Again, that's not complaining, it's just calling out lack of clear ciommunication. We do expect better there

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this my kid is never getting into college anywhere she wants to go. She’s a B+ student at top private in DC. She loves shopping at Target. Maybe she should just get a job there and throw in the towel.

I think you are just joking but on the off-chance you are not, your daughter is likely getting a great education and will get into a bunch of schools with the right list. The good news is so many colleges are out there and she can be successful from so many different choices. I think where people get in trouble is when they have a “top college” or bust mentality.

Yes, I'm joking, but, at the same time, I don't think that she's going to love her choices. She does not have her eyes set on the Ivies, but the schools she likes, at least looking at the data, are going to be so far out of her reach. When I look at her non-academic criteria for schools (geographic preference, school setting, size of school) and then look at her grades, there aren't a lot of options on paper. She's going to need to broaden her criteria to give herself realistic choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also a HW parent. A few things that might useful to consider:

1. HW is the only school of its type in the country that publishes this kind of data. I know of no other school that breaks out the acceptances into hooked/unhooked. This says a lot about the school, in my estimation, both in terms of how things work internally and how it presents itself publicly.

2. it is useful to compare the unhooked acceptances with published acceptances for all students, which can also be found if you look around. But generally speaking many legacy-type students are also in that top band of 3.8+, from what I can tell. Unhooked students going to Stanford or Harvard are probably just a few per year. But there are many more hooked students going, and they are typically very good students if not tiptop. Many of the Princeton kids seem to be water polo players

3. HW does not, however, publish ED vs. RD numbers, which would tell us a lot about applications to schools like Chicago and NYU. The data would be that much more useful if they did this.

4. 3.8+ equates, as best I can tell, to the top 20 percent of a class. So let's say 55-60 students.

5. Financial aid at HW is only 25 percent of families. The parents are generally well-to-do, sometimes obscenely rich (I know of parents who live in 40-60 m dollar houses). But the vast majority of parents are upper-middle-class-to-rich professionals: law, finance, medicine. Not a few film industry people, but mostly the money side, not the "talent." I don't think the "famous parent" thing is really a big deal, though of course it will seem that way relative to other cities.

6. One other thought: HW is one of many, many schools in the city, but it strikes me as the one most likely to draw from kids all over the city, as a rule, though most are from the rich west side of the city. It is also much larger than other privates, with 300 students roughly per class. It is universally recognized as the most academically intense school in the city; it is in no way seen as simply as a school for the city's elite, even if that might be the perception outside of LA.

Do you know what the “etc” means in the definition of unhooked? What students are excluded from this data, in other words.

Thanks for your insight. Your posts are interesting.

Anonymous wrote:Also a HW parent. A few things that might useful to consider:

1. HW is the only school of its type in the country that publishes this kind of data. I know of no other school that breaks out the acceptances into hooked/unhooked. This says a lot about the school, in my estimation, both in terms of how things work internally and how it presents itself publicly.

2. it is useful to compare the unhooked acceptances with published acceptances for all students, which can also be found if you look around. But generally speaking many legacy-type students are also in that top band of 3.8+, from what I can tell. Unhooked students going to Stanford or Harvard are probably just a few per year. But there are many more hooked students going, and they are typically very good students if not tiptop. Many of the Princeton kids seem to be water polo players

3. HW does not, however, publish ED vs. RD numbers, which would tell us a lot about applications to schools like Chicago and NYU. The data would be that much more useful if they did this.

4. 3.8+ equates, as best I can tell, to the top 20 percent of a class. So let's say 55-60 students.

5. Financial aid at HW is only 25 percent of families. The parents are generally well-to-do, sometimes obscenely rich (I know of parents who live in 40-60 m dollar houses). But the vast majority of parents are upper-middle-class-to-rich professionals: law, finance, medicine. Not a few film industry people, but mostly the money side, not the "talent." I don't think the "famous parent" thing is really a big deal, though of course it will seem that way relative to other cities.

6. One other thought: HW is one of many, many schools in the city, but it strikes me as the one most likely to draw from kids all over the city, as a rule, though most are from the rich west side of the city. It is also much larger than other privates, with 300 students roughly per class. It is universally recognized as the most academically intense school in the city; it is in no way seen as simply as a school for the city's elite, even if that might be the perception outside of LA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this my kid is never getting into college anywhere she wants to go. She’s a B+ student at top private in DC. She loves shopping at Target. Maybe she should just get a job there and throw in the towel.

I have a B student at a top private feeling very badly right now as deferall, waitlist, and her first rejection even, come rolling in. It is not a fun situation. And my DD is no slacker. A hard-working, caring, talented athlete, with ADHD who got a C and C+ during remote learning her freshman year from which there was no recovering. Had between 3.5 and 3.7 every semester since, but there was just no recovering. Very depressing.

Would be more helpful if the schools were identified or, at least, identified as reach, target/match, or safety schools. If the negative news was from all super elite top 20 schools, then your daughter should appreciate being deferred and waitlisted. Context matters and specifics matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Generally, rich kids do fine OP, even if they are mediocre students or people

HW is really rigorous academically—definitely comparable to the DC big 3.

I have only scanned this thread, so maybe it has been touched on, but HW seems to have far fewer graduates with GPAs around 3.1 and under than the "big 3." StA, Sidwell, NCS, Potomac--all have a higher number of students around the 3.0. HW=grade inflation, just like everywhere else.

Again, this is a small sample of probably no more than the same 50-100 kids, all of whom are unhooked. You cannot reach any conclusions about the GPAs of the school as a whole from this.

With 201 applications to Michigan, I'm pretty sure the sample is bigger than 50-100...

Okay, sure, call it 200 or so, but the point is that there are going to be a lot of repeats in the group, because unhooked kids necessarily cast a very wide net. Each data point in their chart is not one unique student and people in this thread are acting like it is.

My guess is that a chart like this from most top privates would look very similar as far as GPA ranges.

Because literally every HW student applies to Michigan? (I actually agree with your broader point, but the "call it 200" response makes you look like a clown.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Generally, rich kids do fine OP, even if they are mediocre students or people

HW is really rigorous academically—definitely comparable to the DC big 3.

I have only scanned this thread, so maybe it has been touched on, but HW seems to have far fewer graduates with GPAs around 3.1 and under than the "big 3." StA, Sidwell, NCS, Potomac--all have a higher number of students around the 3.0. HW=grade inflation, just like everywhere else.

Again, this is a small sample of probably no more than the same 50-100 kids, all of whom are unhooked. You cannot reach any conclusions about the GPAs of the school as a whole from this.

With 201 applications to Michigan, I'm pretty sure the sample is bigger than 50-100...

Okay, sure, call it 200 or so, but the point is that there are going to be a lot of repeats in the group, because unhooked kids necessarily cast a very wide net. Each data point in their chart is not one unique student and people in this thread are acting like it is.

My guess is that a chart like this from most top privates would look very similar as far as GPA ranges.