Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My goodness, the last post just demonstrated total ignorance about how bias is perpetrated. You do not think that females can be sexists and African americans or immigrants can be racists?? This shows how shallow "diversity" awareness is in Sidwell.

+1. I have no dog in this fight. However, if those biases were an issue, it’s nice to see a family of means fighting back. There could be kids on scholarship with worst stories.

Anonymous wrote:My goodness, the last post just demonstrated total ignorance about how bias is perpetrated. You do not think that females can be sexists and African americans or immigrants can be racists?? This shows how shallow "diversity" awareness is in Sidwell.

Anonymous wrote:My goodness, the last post just demonstrated total ignorance about how bias is perpetrated. You do not think that females can be sexists and African americans or immigrants can be racists?? This shows how shallow "diversity" awareness is in Sidwell.

Anonymous wrote:My goodness, the last post just demonstrated total ignorance about how bias is perpetrated. You do not think that females can be sexists and African americans or immigrants can be racists?? This shows how shallow "diversity" awareness is in Sidwell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that stands out to me the most from this thread is the vitriol against this girl and her family coming from people who claim to be students or parents of students at Sidwell. I am not seeing any Quaker values. Heck, I'm not seeing any positive values at all. It is sad. And embarrassing.

Speaking of no positive values, why would she and her parents literally make a Supreme Court case out of a math grade and some claimed emotional distress "injury" that she didn't get to Harvard, Princeton or Yale and had to "settle" for Penn? Now, that's sad and embarrassing.

IMHO judges should have the authority to make such frivolous plaintiffs spend a weekend or two in jail to contemplate their folly.

If their reason is that gender or racial or ethnic or other bias is the reason behind the wrong grades that were then corrected to the right grades, then I'm behind them all the way. Are you saying that you're okay with Sidwell acting with bias towards a child?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that stands out to me the most from this thread is the vitriol against this girl and her family coming from people who claim to be students or parents of students at Sidwell. I am not seeing any Quaker values. Heck, I'm not seeing any positive values at all. It is sad. And embarrassing.

Speaking of no positive values, why would she and her parents literally make a Supreme Court case out of a math grade and some claimed emotional distress "injury" that she didn't get to Harvard, Princeton or Yale and had to "settle" for Penn? Now, that's sad and embarrassing.

IMHO judges should have the authority to make such frivolous plaintiffs spend a weekend or two in jail to contemplate their folly.

Anonymous wrote:The thing that stands out to me the most from this thread is the vitriol against this girl and her family coming from people who claim to be students or parents of students at Sidwell. I am not seeing any Quaker values. Heck, I'm not seeing any positive values at all. It is sad. And embarrassing.

Anonymous wrote:So it looks like she applied to 13 schools, and almost all of them would be considered reaches even for a very top student. Can't imagine a college counselor being happy about that list or too surprised about the outcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current Sidwell high school parent, I am appalled that the college counselors would change a kids recommendation from one college application to another. No wonder the college counseling office has such a poor reputation year after year.

I was surprised by this too. Do all the DC private high schools do this or is this just at Sidwell?

I think those forms are meant to relate the applicant to the cohort of other applicants, and as such, they have to change from one school to another. Unless the applicant is the tippy-top of students.

In other words, for this student, she was a strong candidate for Spellman but maybe a middle applicant, as compared to her cohort, for Harvard. If the schools college guidance office isn't honest with the universities, they won't have credibility.

I am hard pressed to understand your complaint here.

Because that’s not really how the question is worded, and because it allows the counselors to boost or torpedo particular applications.

That is always the case. They have to rate the applicants to the cohort applying. Its like the line from "The Incredibles" - when everyone is special, no one is - if the college counselors tell the colleges that every one of the applicants is a 10 out of 10 across the board without distinguishing among applicants, who who is lying? They will have no credibility with the colleges if everyone is a 10. It just isn't realistic that 15 people applying to Yale are going to get top A1 recs from the school.

If you read the case, you will see that, in fact, the applicant is supposed to be evaluated against the entire class, not just those applying. So it was wrong of them to change the rating based on the application. The rating was the same for all the Ivies and improved for Spellman. It does change my whole view of college counseling. The next time the school says we have to trust them, it will be very hard not to ask why.

True! Wonder if colleges are aware this is how SFS rates applicants?

+ 1,000,000 - Corrupted to the core.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current Sidwell high school parent, I am appalled that the college counselors would change a kids recommendation from one college application to another. No wonder the college counseling office has such a poor reputation year after year.

I was surprised by this too. Do all the DC private high schools do this or is this just at Sidwell?

I think those forms are meant to relate the applicant to the cohort of other applicants, and as such, they have to change from one school to another. Unless the applicant is the tippy-top of students.

In other words, for this student, she was a strong candidate for Spellman but maybe a middle applicant, as compared to her cohort, for Harvard. If the schools college guidance office isn't honest with the universities, they won't have credibility.

I am hard pressed to understand your complaint here.

Because that’s not really how the question is worded, and because it allows the counselors to boost or torpedo particular applications.

That is always the case. They have to rate the applicants to the cohort applying. Its like the line from "The Incredibles" - when everyone is special, no one is - if the college counselors tell the colleges that every one of the applicants is a 10 out of 10 across the board without distinguishing among applicants, who who is lying? They will have no credibility with the colleges if everyone is a 10. It just isn't realistic that 15 people applying to Yale are going to get top A1 recs from the school.

If you read the case, you will see that, in fact, the applicant is supposed to be evaluated against the entire class, not just those applying. So it was wrong of them to change the rating based on the application. The rating was the same for all the Ivies and improved for Spellman. It does change my whole view of college counseling. The next time the school says we have to trust them, it will be very hard not to ask why.

True! Wonder if colleges are aware this is how SFS rates applicants?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current Sidwell high school parent, I am appalled that the college counselors would change a kids recommendation from one college application to another. No wonder the college counseling office has such a poor reputation year after year.

I was surprised by this too. Do all the DC private high schools do this or is this just at Sidwell?

I think those forms are meant to relate the applicant to the cohort of other applicants, and as such, they have to change from one school to another. Unless the applicant is the tippy-top of students.

In other words, for this student, she was a strong candidate for Spellman but maybe a middle applicant, as compared to her cohort, for Harvard. If the schools college guidance office isn't honest with the universities, they won't have credibility.

I am hard pressed to understand your complaint here.

Because that’s not really how the question is worded, and because it allows the counselors to boost or torpedo particular applications.

Stats are stats and numbers are numbers. I don’t see anything is wrong to compare applicants in the same pool.

That is always the case. They have to rate the applicants to the cohort applying. Its like the line from "The Incredibles" - when everyone is special, no one is - if the college counselors tell the colleges that every one of the applicants is a 10 out of 10 across the board without distinguishing among applicants, who who is lying? They will have no credibility with the colleges if everyone is a 10. It just isn't realistic that 15 people applying to Yale are going to get top A1 recs from the school.

If you read the case, you will see that, in fact, the applicant is supposed to be evaluated against the entire class, not just those applying. So it was wrong of them to change the rating based on the application. The rating was the same for all the Ivies and improved for Spellman. It does change my whole view of college counseling. The next time the school says we have to trust them, it will be very hard not to ask why.

True! Wonder if colleges are aware this is how SFS rates applicants?

+ 1,000,000 - Corrupted to the core.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder whether some Sidwell parents used Singer in the past and recommended him to the school. Which would raise new questions about the authenticity of those admissions. God forbid!

Regardless of the merits of the case, it is so ironic that he was used to evaluate her case and concluded that she was not qualified for the Ivies and yet at the same time he was getting other students into Ivies under false pretences.

I wonder if you used Singer. Maybe you referred him to Sidwell. I wonder if your kids cheated on their SATs. See how “wondering” works?

DP. And your wondering makes me wonder why you're so attached to him. I wonder if you paid him yourself? Perhaps you used him?

The first PP is spot on. Someone who is a liar and a fraud is being judged worthy to evaluate this girl's application? And you believe him? Really? Better than that, the folks at Sidwell believed him?

The rumors about Singer have been swirling for years. That anyone with any ethics or morals would come nearer to him than a 100 miles is too weird to be true. If you really think he is so trustworthy then I have a bridge I'd like you to see. I'll get you a good deal...

Yes because it’s impossible to think that Singer is a liar and a fraud AND that it’s ridiculous to speculate that Sidwell parents hired him in the absence of any evidence. I can see how holding these two thoughts in your pea sized brain at the same time is too taxing. If Sidwell parents hired him those facts will come out soon enough and we can all enjoy roasting them over an open flame. Until then, yes, it is just as likely that I hired him as that you hired him.

Well, me with my pea-sized brain never hired him because my pea-sized brain realizes that where there is smoke there is likely fire so we stayed way far away from him. But that's just me and my pea-sized brain. That guy oozes used-car-salesman. If you walked away from meeting him and didn't check your pocket for your wallet then you deserve what you got. Which is why it is so ludicrous for people, like the people at Sidwell, to say "we didn't know."

So you knew about Singer BEFORE he was arrested? You even met with him? Wow.

We were at the same cocktail party here in DC although I purposefully did not meet him. Heard of him from friends in LA. They said he was a big stinkaroo. If you didn't know about him before he was arrested then you had your head under a rock. Why do you think he was here in DC anyway? How do you think he got hooked up with Sidwell? Do you really have such narrow tunnel vision and get out so little?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current Sidwell high school parent, I am appalled that the college counselors would change a kids recommendation from one college application to another. No wonder the college counseling office has such a poor reputation year after year.

I was surprised by this too. Do all the DC private high schools do this or is this just at Sidwell?

I think those forms are meant to relate the applicant to the cohort of other applicants, and as such, they have to change from one school to another. Unless the applicant is the tippy-top of students.

In other words, for this student, she was a strong candidate for Spellman but maybe a middle applicant, as compared to her cohort, for Harvard. If the schools college guidance office isn't honest with the universities, they won't have credibility.

I am hard pressed to understand your complaint here.

Because that’s not really how the question is worded, and because it allows the counselors to boost or torpedo particular applications.

That is always the case. They have to rate the applicants to the cohort applying. Its like the line from "The Incredibles" - when everyone is special, no one is - if the college counselors tell the colleges that every one of the applicants is a 10 out of 10 across the board without distinguishing among applicants, who who is lying? They will have no credibility with the colleges if everyone is a 10. It just isn't realistic that 15 people applying to Yale are going to get top A1 recs from the school.

If you read the case, you will see that, in fact, the applicant is supposed to be evaluated against the entire class, not just those applying. So it was wrong of them to change the rating based on the application. The rating was the same for all the Ivies and improved for Spellman. It does change my whole view of college counseling. The next time the school says we have to trust them, it will be very hard not to ask why.

True! Wonder if colleges are aware this is how SFS rates applicants?