Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suburb hater is back. I forget if it is the same person as Trevor hater. Don't engage. Not even worth a conversation.

Love,
A native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools married to another native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools and pretty sure we are making much more than this childish clown and are also more cultured and definitely have a much higher EQ.

What are you talking about? No one is saying you can’t go to an Ivy from the suburbs.

Bragging about money is gauche even if it’s in response to someone doing the same. Super off putting.

Loser. Sorry you never left Manhattan. Or Queens.

Idk what you’re referring to. Please be kinder.

You called everyone and everything in the suburbs awful and horrible and said nothing good came from there. Right back at you. Good night.

Anonymous wrote:I love living in NYC. But I loved growing up in a very good (though not top name brand) suburb. Lots of smart, successful, interesting families. Also plenty of diversity that exposed me to the real world. I excelled at an Ivy, as did many of my other classmates. But I was also in homeroom with kids who joined the military or worked fixing cars. I worked hard in HS but not too much - nice balance - also played varsity sports (which was on fields and tennis courts next to the school, rather than running all over the five boroughs), went to parties, knew all of my friends families very well and we all looked out for each other.

Now I do not think it is as great but still a very viable option. Especially if at least one parent is working in the burbs.

Anyone who speaks so absolutely about anything should be ignored. Nothing is all good or all bad. If you think that way you are an idiot. I will start reporting you and Jeff will delete all your posts. Stop. This was a decent conversation and has gone to hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suburb hater is back. I forget if it is the same person as Trevor hater. Don't engage. Not even worth a conversation.

Love,
A native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools married to another native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools and pretty sure we are making much more than this childish clown and are also more cultured and definitely have a much higher EQ.

What are you talking about? No one is saying you can’t go to an Ivy from the suburbs.

Bragging about money is gauche even if it’s in response to someone doing the same. Super off putting.

Loser. Sorry you never left Manhattan. Or Queens.

Idk what you’re referring to. Please be kinder.

Anonymous wrote:I love living in NYC. But I loved growing up in a very good (though not top name brand) suburb. Lots of smart, successful, interesting families. Also plenty of diversity that exposed me to the real world. I excelled at an Ivy, as did many of my other classmates. But I was also in homeroom with kids who joined the military or worked fixing cars. I worked hard in HS but not too much - nice balance - also played varsity sports (which was on fields and tennis courts next to the school, rather than running all over the five boroughs), went to parties, knew all of my friends families very well and we all looked out for each other.

Now I do not think it is as great but still a very viable option. Especially if at least one parent is working in the burbs.

Anyone who speaks so absolutely about anything should be ignored. Nothing is all good or all bad. If you think that way you are an idiot. I will start reporting you and Jeff will delete all your posts. Stop. This was a decent conversation and has gone to hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suburb hater is back. I forget if it is the same person as Trevor hater. Don't engage. Not even worth a conversation.

Love,
A native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools married to another native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools and pretty sure we are making much more than this childish clown and are also more cultured and definitely have a much higher EQ.

What are you talking about? No one is saying you can’t go to an Ivy from the suburbs.

Bragging about money is gauche even if it’s in response to someone doing the same. Super off putting.

Loser. Sorry you never left Manhattan. Or Queens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Very often the case. If your standard family at a highly ranked public was making enough to comfortably afford a 3BR and two tuitions in Manhattan, they’d be doing it. Most got forced out and come here to explain why the suburbs are actually better than the world’s most popular destination.

And also why they tiger mom their kids so they can get into a good school so they don’t have to move out of the city when they are 35 and deciding about schools.

Yep. It’s depressing and dispiriting for them. It’s self inflicted, going to Chatham (lol) isn’t going to lead to some incredible life outcome compared to some decent K-8 in nyc.

We actually like the town. A bit whiter than would like but nice downtown. But when we looked the college exmissions were pretty weak for what everyone was telling us was a great school system.

So we stayed in our very good public school and then put the kids into private school for middle school and high school.

Our public went to 8th grade so not as stressful when looking for a private school since we had the fall back option of staying.

Throw in a shit commute for both of us.

Much better to walk 5-10 minutes to work. And have the kids go to private where they don’t stab each other over .1 gpa - all for the privilege of going to bc.

All true. These towns can be beautiful. I don’t think they’re good in terms of raising resourceful, independent, and thoughtful young adults. My only caveat is if a kid is truly a gifted athlete, then maybe it can make sense. Even those who spend all summer playing lax aren’t, though

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Suburb hater is back. I forget if it is the same person as Trevor hater. Don't engage. Not even worth a conversation.

Love,
A native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools married to another native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools and pretty sure we are making much more than this childish clown and are also more cultured and definitely have a much higher EQ.

What are you talking about? No one is saying you can’t go to an Ivy from the suburbs.

Bragging about money is gauche even if it’s in response to someone doing the same. Super off putting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

So I'm a bit conflicted here. I believe Princeton High School has better exmissions. 20 went to Princeton this year but supposedly only 4 to 5 without family affiliation at the university. 4 to Penn including 2 Wharton, 6 to Cornell and 7 to other Ivies, Duke or UChicago. So call it 37 Ivy+ exmits. I've heard anecdotally that only about 50 to 60 kids in a class of 300 are really gunning for the top colleges. So in this way it felt that getting into a good college would be actually LESS competitive than at a TT. Would be super curious to hear what the PHS alumn posting here has to say.

you are nuts if you think only 60 kids from Princeton high school are shooting for top schools.

Princeton is a top school district.

It’s brutally competitive I have heard.

Are more than 15% to 20% of suburb kids doing 8+ APs in any given class? If so this feels like a much higher percentage than when I was in HS (albeit my public HS was absolutely terrible). In terms of competition Princeton itself is not as bad as West Windsor-Plainsboro (65% East and South Asian) or Montgomery.

Anonymous wrote:Suburb hater is back. I forget if it is the same person as Trevor hater. Don't engage. Not even worth a conversation.

Love,
A native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools married to another native of a suburb who went to two Ivy schools and pretty sure we are making much more than this childish clown and are also more cultured and definitely have a much higher EQ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

So I'm a bit conflicted here. I believe Princeton High School has better exmissions. 20 went to Princeton this year but supposedly only 4 to 5 without family affiliation at the university. 4 to Penn including 2 Wharton, 6 to Cornell and 7 to other Ivies, Duke or UChicago. So call it 37 Ivy+ exmits. I've heard anecdotally that only about 50 to 60 kids in a class of 300 are really gunning for the top colleges. So in this way it felt that getting into a good college would be actually LESS competitive than at a TT. Would be super curious to hear what the PHS alumn posting here has to say.

you are nuts if you think only 60 kids from Princeton high school are shooting for top schools.

Princeton is a top school district.

It’s brutally competitive I have heard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Very often the case. If your standard family at a highly ranked public was making enough to comfortably afford a 3BR and two tuitions in Manhattan, they’d be doing it. Most got forced out and come here to explain why the suburbs are actually better than the world’s most popular destination.

And also why they tiger mom their kids so they can get into a good school so they don’t have to move out of the city when they are 35 and deciding about schools.

Yep. It’s depressing and dispiriting for them. It’s self inflicted, going to Chatham (lol) isn’t going to lead to some incredible life outcome compared to some decent K-8 in nyc.

We actually like the town. A bit whiter than would like but nice downtown. But when we looked the college exmissions were pretty weak for what everyone was telling us was a great school system.

So we stayed in our very good public school and then put the kids into private school for middle school and high school.

Our public went to 8th grade so not as stressful when looking for a private school since we had the fall back option of staying.

Throw in a shit commute for both of us.

Much better to walk 5-10 minutes to work. And have the kids go to private where they don’t stab each other over .1 gpa - all for the privilege of going to bc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Very often the case. If your standard family at a highly ranked public was making enough to comfortably afford a 3BR and two tuitions in Manhattan, they’d be doing it. Most got forced out and come here to explain why the suburbs are actually better than the world’s most popular destination.

And also why they tiger mom their kids so they can get into a good school so they don’t have to move out of the city when they are 35 and deciding about schools.

Yep. It’s depressing and dispiriting for them. It’s self inflicted, going to Chatham (lol) isn’t going to lead to some incredible life outcome compared to some decent K-8 in nyc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Very often the case. If your standard family at a highly ranked public was making enough to comfortably afford a 3BR and two tuitions in Manhattan, they’d be doing it. Most got forced out and come here to explain why the suburbs are actually better than the world’s most popular destination.

And also why they tiger mom their kids so they can get into a good school so they don’t have to move out of the city when they are 35 and deciding about schools.