how did Sidwell's seniors do at Harvard and Stanford? where do Sidwell's top kids want to go? I've heard that Yale is considered more desirable at Sidwell. is that the case?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell parents should be ashamed of themselves. No tact, no class.

How ridiculous. I'm not a Sidwell parent , and I admit to being envious that my child didn't apply anywhere in the early pools now, but how is anonymously posting how your child did worthy of a "no class" comment? I'd be curious if you are a parent or a student, but I doubt we would find out the truth anyway.

On a different note, now that we know at least one DC private got several kids into a few top schools, do people think that decreases the numbers they will take from other DC schools during RD? I'm nervous now that we weren't more encouraging to apply early, especially since I am now learning a lot of colleges fill more than half of their class through early admissions.

+1. My son was interested in Penn. Yikes!

Penn routinely takes around 5-10 students from each of the top area schools -- and mostly all ED.

And they take very few from the publics. Given that they've almost filled half the class, you'd think the vast majority of regular admits would be from publics. Columbia seems to do the opposite -- a dozen or so from Blair alone every year, and not all of these are from the magnet, but fewer from the privates. I have no idea why this would be. We could speculate that Penn is looking to early admits for the full-pay part of the class, but who knows if that's true.

It could simply be the biases/priorities of the regional admission person for this area, whose viewpoint counts for a lot.

For Penn, the Dean if a Admissions is the DC rep. Between a panel at my child's school and one of the college experience nights he did at a local public, my son got to meet him twice and ask questions. He's applying RD (deferred from Harvard ) so I am hoping the Dean somehow remembers my son!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell parents should be ashamed of themselves. No tact, no class.

How ridiculous. I'm not a Sidwell parent , and I admit to being envious that my child didn't apply anywhere in the early pools now, but how is anonymously posting how your child did worthy of a "no class" comment? I'd be curious if you are a parent or a student, but I doubt we would find out the truth anyway.

On a different note, now that we know at least one DC private got several kids into a few top schools, do people think that decreases the numbers they will take from other DC schools during RD? I'm nervous now that we weren't more encouraging to apply early, especially since I am now learning a lot of colleges fill more than half of their class through early admissions.

+1. My son was interested in Penn. Yikes!

Penn routinely takes around 5-10 students from each of the top area schools -- and mostly all ED.

And they take very few from the publics. Given that they've almost filled half the class, you'd think the vast majority of regular admits would be from publics. Columbia seems to do the opposite -- a dozen or so from Blair alone every year, and not all of these are from the magnet, but fewer from the privates. I have no idea why this would be. We could speculate that Penn is looking to early admits for the full-pay part of the class, but who knows if that's true.

That's a good point. I'm guessing a good percentage of kids that apply early to top schools from the well-known privates around the country probably don't need much aid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell parents should be ashamed of themselves. No tact, no class.

How ridiculous. I'm not a Sidwell parent , and I admit to being envious that my child didn't apply anywhere in the early pools now, but how is anonymously posting how your child did worthy of a "no class" comment? I'd be curious if you are a parent or a student, but I doubt we would find out the truth anyway.

On a different note, now that we know at least one DC private got several kids into a few top schools, do people think that decreases the numbers they will take from other DC schools during RD? I'm nervous now that we weren't more encouraging to apply early, especially since I am now learning a lot of colleges fill more than half of their class through early admissions.

+1. My son was interested in Penn. Yikes!

Penn routinely takes around 5-10 students from each of the top area schools -- and mostly all ED.

And they take very few from the publics. Given that they've almost filled half the class, you'd think the vast majority of regular admits would be from publics. Columbia seems to do the opposite -- a dozen or so from Blair alone every year, and not all of these are from the magnet, but fewer from the privates. I have no idea why this would be. We could speculate that Penn is looking to early admits for the full-pay part of the class, but who knows if that's true.

It could simply be the biases/priorities of the regional admission person for this area, whose viewpoint counts for a lot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell parents should be ashamed of themselves. No tact, no class.

How ridiculous. I'm not a Sidwell parent , and I admit to being envious that my child didn't apply anywhere in the early pools now, but how is anonymously posting how your child did worthy of a "no class" comment? I'd be curious if you are a parent or a student, but I doubt we would find out the truth anyway.

On a different note, now that we know at least one DC private got several kids into a few top schools, do people think that decreases the numbers they will take from other DC schools during RD? I'm nervous now that we weren't more encouraging to apply early, especially since I am now learning a lot of colleges fill more than half of their class through early admissions.

+1. My son was interested in Penn. Yikes!

Penn routinely takes around 5-10 students from each of the top area schools -- and mostly all ED.

And they take very few from the publics. Given that they've almost filled half the class, you'd think the vast majority of regular admits would be from publics. Columbia seems to do the opposite -- a dozen or so from Blair alone every year, and not all of these are from the magnet, but fewer from the privates. I have no idea why this would be. We could speculate that Penn is looking to early admits for the full-pay part of the class, but who knows if that's true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell parents should be ashamed of themselves. No tact, no class.

How ridiculous. I'm not a Sidwell parent , and I admit to being envious that my child didn't apply anywhere in the early pools now, but how is anonymously posting how your child did worthy of a "no class" comment? I'd be curious if you are a parent or a student, but I doubt we would find out the truth anyway.

On a different note, now that we know at least one DC private got several kids into a few top schools, do people think that decreases the numbers they will take from other DC schools during RD? I'm nervous now that we weren't more encouraging to apply early, especially since I am now learning a lot of colleges fill more than half of their class through early admissions.

+1. My son was interested in Penn. Yikes!

Penn routinely takes around 5-10 students from each of the top area schools -- and mostly all ED.

Anonymous wrote:Very interesting approach by Penn over the last couple of years to aggressively use ED to avoid being the HYP back-up school. This year they admitted 1,316 of 5,489 applicants - 24 percent.

That's also about 54% of all the seats in the freshman class already filled.

They've done that since the late 1980s -- (Penn Alum, applied early).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I once saw a recommendation letter for a highly-sought after position that had a handwritten note to the addressee in the margin that simply said, "not for you." The official letter in the sender's files would say glowing things, but a different message was conveyed. Maybe it's similar or it's a matter of a phone call during which the counselor provides tone and context to allow the college official to sense which student the recommender believes would fit best.

I think it's usually quite the opposite. College counseling staff are in selling mode when they talk with colleges.

Actually, counselors are also in the mode of preserving their relationships with colleges. Sure, they look good if they help a number of kids get into great schools in a given year. But they also have a longer view, over many years ahead, that depends on earning a college' admissions office's trust in their recommendations. So they're not going to push the class pothead, or even an under-whelming kid, and burn that relationship.

Re the teachers' rec forms. Often colleges ask teachers to compare the kids to other students in current and past classes. So, is this student "average" or "among the best" or "in the top 1-2% of kids you've ever taught"? I've seen forms that will ask various questions about work, writing ability, innovation and such, and then ask teachers to do this ranking for each question.

Our college counselors advise the teachers NOT to fill out the checkboxes. It's still up to the teachers but many avoid the checkboxes and reference their letter. The Commom App now has a place for teachers to indicate that they don't fill out the checkboxes.

When you talk to the college admissions staffers and they are candid, they will admit that they like the checkboxes bc they use them to eliminate students. Thus the advice not to fill out that part of the form.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I once saw a recommendation letter for a highly-sought after position that had a handwritten note to the addressee in the margin that simply said, "not for you." The official letter in the sender's files would say glowing things, but a different message was conveyed. Maybe it's similar or it's a matter of a phone call during which the counselor provides tone and context to allow the college official to sense which student the recommender believes would fit best.

I think it's usually quite the opposite. College counseling staff are in selling mode when they talk with colleges.

Actually, counselors are also in the mode of preserving their relationships with colleges. Sure, they look good if they help a number of kids get into great schools in a given year. But they also have a longer view, over many years ahead, that depends on earning a college' admissions office's trust in their recommendations. So they're not going to push the class pothead, or even an under-whelming kid, and burn that relationship.

Re the teachers' rec forms. Often colleges ask teachers to compare the kids to other students in current and past classes. So, is this student "average" or "among the best" or "in the top 1-2% of kids you've ever taught"? I've seen forms that will ask various questions about work, writing ability, innovation and such, and then ask teachers to do this ranking for each question.

Anonymous wrote:While I've been a big supporter of my kid's college counselor in other threads, I will say there's no question a counselor can shape a letter to make it clear who the school's top candidates are.

For schools that don't rank, it's as easy as a line like: "Susie has the highest GPA in her grade." Still no ranking, but the counselor has let the college know she's #1 in her class.

The highly selective colleges with big admissions staffs that are able to carefully read files and not rely as much on numbers don't actually need the counselor letters to compare the candidates side by side. The admissions rep for a region will generally present the candidates geographically, and the committee can make actual side-by-side comparisons of transcripts: not just overall GPA/grades, but rigor of courses. College admissions now also includes a lot of data manipulation/numbers crunching, and many colleges apply their own internal weighting system to "normalize" grades. (So Harvard won't automatically think a 5.0 on a 4.0 scale from a not great public or private school is better than a 3.9 at Sidwell or Roxbury Latin or Collegiate or Trinity or Harvard-Westlake, to name some well-regarded private schools). Again, the reps get familiar with these schools FAST and they are adept at the side-by-side comparisons.

The counselor letters, at their best, present a narrative for a student. Teachers are asked to confine their recommendation letters almost totally to the student's academic performance in THEIR classroom. The counselor letter is what pulls the whole "story' of the child together. The student who is quiet in class but writes some of the most brilliantly eloquent prose their teachers have ever seen. The student who is a genius with science and engineering who makes robots in their spare time and started the robotics club from scratch. The quirky kid with the interesting mind who doesn't always remember to turn in her Spanish homework but writes code at such a high level that the school IT department consults her. The student who came in 9th grade and had to play catch-up but impressed all of his teachers with his passionate desire to excel in math and science so he can be a doctor. The lacrosse superstar who has been first cello in the school orchestra. You read the letters and think, "this is a neat kid who we'd like to have at our college, they would add to our community in such and such a way."

While I've been a big supporter of my kid's college counselor in other threads, I will say there's no question a counselor can shape a letter to make it clear who the school's top candidates are.

For schools that don't rank, it's as easy as a line like: "Susie has the highest GPA in her grade." Still no ranking, but the counselor has let the college know she's #1 in her class.

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what goes into the school letters from the high school counselors. Do they compare the kids when so many apply to the same one - especially where there is no GPA or rank? Is that where they can give some kids a boost (or not)? This whole process seems so mysterious!!

Advising the kids to play to their strengths (leveraging legacy status) or steering them too aggressively and not allowing free choice. Being realistic about odds of getting in or telling them what their parents might want to hear. Having no influence with admissions officers or too much influence. Which is it?

Anonymous wrote:I once saw a recommendation letter for a highly-sought after position that had a handwritten note to the addressee in the margin that simply said, "not for you." The official letter in the sender's files would say glowing things, but a different message was conveyed. Maybe it's similar or it's a matter of a phone call during which the counselor provides tone and context to allow the college official to sense which student the recommender believes would fit best.

I think it's usually quite the opposite. College counseling staff are in selling mode when they talk with colleges.

I once saw a recommendation letter for a highly-sought after position that had a handwritten note to the addressee in the margin that simply said, "not for you." The official letter in the sender's files would say glowing things, but a different message was conveyed. Maybe it's similar or it's a matter of a phone call during which the counselor provides tone and context to allow the college official to sense which student the recommender believes would fit best.

I wonder what goes into the school letters from the high school counselors. Do they compare the kids when so many apply to the same one - especially where there is no GPA or rank? Is that where they can give some kids a boost (or not)? This whole process seems so mysterious!!