Anonymous wrote:Rankings based on mean scores aren’t helpful in terms of gauging opportunity or quality. It mostly reflects socio-economic standing, and intended to justify real-estate values. The college admissions data above seems more on point since it’s about real people and outcomes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.
That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.
?
No the kids are just cherry picked by having wealthy parents..a tough admissions standard!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.
That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.
?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.
That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.
That's silly, PP. Everybody knows that the magnate kids are at Whitman.
Anonymous wrote:
Looking at one Elite school for one year you can't possible get a reflection of a school's track record. Whitman has long been the standard that all other school are held to and does so without propping it's test scores up with cherry picked magnate kids. Whitman has the highest scores simple with inbound kids unlike many of other schools.
Anonymous wrote:The magazine is cleary wrong. No way Harvard would admit 0 students from Churchill, and take 2 from that armpit known as WJ.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In terms of test scores, graduation rates and college preparedness Whitman is the clear leader but it often get penalized because save for a couple of domestic help type's kids there are simply no poor areas that feed into it and is all but void of FARMs. Now that doesn't make for a great school necessarily because those kids would probably do well anywhere but Whitman does a great job cultivating them.
Looking at the college acceptances (which really should be reflective of your 3 points), that is not the case.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The 0-27 cannot be right for Churchill. Are you sure it wasn't 20/27?
Get the magazine. Or check it in the grocery line.
Anonymous wrote:In terms of test scores, graduation rates and college preparedness Whitman is the clear leader but it often get penalized because save for a couple of domestic help type's kids there are simply no poor areas that feed into it and is all but void of FARMs. Now that doesn't make for a great school necessarily because those kids would probably do well anywhere but Whitman does a great job cultivating them.
Anonymous wrote:The 0-27 cannot be right for Churchill. Are you sure it wasn't 20/27?