Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Potomac parent here. Your statement is inaccurate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

The PP's argument does not sound racist to me. It sounds honest and thought provoking. This is yet another reason why elite colleges may be on the decline, because meaningless racism banter pushes out intelligent discussion.

URMs and Asian tennis players being the problem and their attendance devaluing an Ivy League degree isn't a race based argument?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

The PP's argument does not sound racist to me. It sounds honest and thought provoking. This is yet another reason why elite colleges may be on the decline, because meaningless racism banter pushes out intelligent discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

man, your argument gets more and more racist every time you refine it. kudos. at least now you're admitting that it has nothing to do with merit and being 'soundly educated'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Husband and I graduated from our state flagship and the private and Catholic school kids ran circles around everyone in the classroom and socially. I went to "one of the best" public schools in the state and could not keep up. They were on a different level. Anyone pinching pennies when it comes to kindergarten through 12th education for an alleged better roll of the dice with Ivies is frankly an idiot.

They're an idiot because there is no better roll at a DMV public. If you ever review the admits from Whitman, Wilson, Mclean, etc. something like 98% of the Ivy admits are legacy, athletes or URM. THE SAME FREAKING demographics as the private school admits. THERE IS NO MAGIC IVY-BOUND HIGH SCHOOL FOR WHITE OR ASIAN KIDS. Except many some of the NE boarding schools?
But actually I'm sure it's the same story there. More admits but they're probably also legacies, URM, athletes plus some Ivy faculty kids thrown in.

At least in the DC area, there aren't a lot of Asians in private high schools. Mainly public. Same for families from India

Isn't it interesting how public schools are still working for asian and indian kids???

interesting how you never hear asian parents saying public schools are not a good fit for their children the way you hear it from white parents on this forum. LOL!

There may be a lot of reasons that Asian families don’t choose private school. It could be that if college admission are the same they don’t see the value. It may not be culturally acceptable/the norm. It could be they don’t have the money. It could be a host of other reasons. Asian families are not a monolith. BTW, I think you would see in other cities that many Asian kids do attend private (like San Francisco or NY). It could definitely be a factor of the particular communities in the DC area or the public schools here.

I feel like I need to “actually” the PPP, but there are a lot of Asian (assuming that this is both East and South Asian?) kids at the elite private schools, particularly the ones with more brand recognition.

NCS, Holton, STA and Potomac have tons of Asian kids - both E and S.

Sidwell does too. It’s really interesting the disconnect between perceptions and reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Different kind of hooks now from 50 years ago. Used to be legacies and selected prep schools. Now it is URMs, etc. Associating with the children of the rich and important used to be part of the perceived value. Now your hooked classmates with be URMs and Asian tennis players. So how much of an Ivy League degree's value comes from networking, how much from learning, and how much from prestige?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

why did you respect a degree from Yale 20 years ago if it was just blatantly for rich kids? I think you could argue that admissions were less meritocratic 20 years ago than they are now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

I do have to agree that the public perception of elite colleges is changing and not for the better. I have two Ivy degrees but even my opinion of these schools have declined in recent years.

I have more respect for the elite colleges of the past. They were blatantly for rich kids and they didn't hide it the way they try to today with weird social engineering and simultaneously trying to pretend to be meritocratic and progressive institutions. Given that meritocracy and progressivity are increasingly decoupling, it's revealing this ugly ideological chasm that really can't be covered up much longer. The American public is much more meritocratic than progressive, and if the elite colleges firmly become progressive, then they do become niche schools and decidedly out of touch and that can catch up in ways they don't expect. I also assume the younger graduates are decidedly more ideological than soundly educated and they have to prove otherwise when I interview them. Don't worry, many do. But many don't, and that perception is growing. I no longer respect a degree from, say, Yale, the way I did 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Elite colleges didn't become elite because of merit admissions. You really think all those people who got admitted before now were admitted strictly on merit?

I guess you don't have a problem with top colleges weighing legacy, athletic abilities and donors before test scores and merit, presumably since those advantages all heavily skew to whites.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP’s initial observation about colleges carries a lot of truth. If top colleges continue to weighing diversity and social justice ahead of test scores and merit, before long a degree from a “top college” will not carry the value that it did historically.

Exactly! The issue is not the death of private schools, but rather the death of elite colleges. In less than one generation from now, the Ivys and similar schools will become niche schools, and lesser known schools that base admissions purely on merit and lower the D&I drumbeat will emerge as the new elite education.

As long as they can convince the wealthy to send their kids and to recruit their graduates, they will be fine. There is absolutely no indication that either is changing.