Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
They also send students to UVA, Va Tech, William & Mary, Johns Hopkins, Penn, Yale, etc. in numbers greater than one would think. It’s easier for good students to stand out at smaller, lower performing schools, and the students probably have compelling stories that AO’s like.
Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Students from lower-performing schools often face significant challenges when they reach competitive colleges, such as Ivy League institutions or UVA. For example, the top golfer at Justice High School likely wouldn't outperform even the lowest-ranked golfer at Langley High School. People often downplay the impact of wealth and academic resources, but these factors play a major role in the gap between high- and low-performing schools. Just saying.
Sure, this could be true in some areas, but the wealthier and/or smarter kids at Justice who perform well on standardized tests are just as capeable as those with similar scores from “prestigious” schools, despite having attended the lower rated ones. So, calling certain fcps schools prestigious is just another way of saying that the parents are rich. It’s not that the quality/rigor is different from other schools. Now, the cut-throat competition might be seen a motivator for students to push themselves. In my view, it’s not a healthy environment for my teenager, but to each their own.
Many choose to sacrifice, be house-poor to make sure their kids got to hang out with wealthier families, that’s their choice. Some of us chose to have extra money saved up for emergencies, college tuition, retirement, etc… and our kids attend one of those “scary” high schools.
Also, nobody will care where your kid went to high school when they are job hunting.
-Signed, current UVA parent
Wealthier families with kids at Justice high school? I live in Seven corners with kids at Justice. My kids said they don't know any wealthy kids at Justice, and that the vast majority of them are on FARMS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Students from lower-performing schools often face significant challenges when they reach competitive colleges, such as Ivy League institutions or UVA. For example, the top golfer at Justice High School likely wouldn't outperform even the lowest-ranked golfer at Langley High School. People often downplay the impact of wealth and academic resources, but these factors play a major role in the gap between high- and low-performing schools. Just saying.
Sure, this could be true in some areas, but the wealthier and/or smarter kids at Justice who perform well on standardized tests are just as capeable as those with similar scores from “prestigious” schools, despite having attended the lower rated ones. So, calling certain fcps schools prestigious is just another way of saying that the parents are rich. It’s not that the quality/rigor is different from other schools. Now, the cut-throat competition might be seen a motivator for students to push themselves. In my view, it’s not a healthy environment for my teenager, but to each their own.
Many choose to sacrifice, be house-poor to make sure their kids got to hang out with wealthier families, that’s their choice. Some of us chose to have extra money saved up for emergencies, college tuition, retirement, etc… and our kids attend one of those “scary” high schools.
Also, nobody will care where your kid went to high school when they are job hunting.
-Signed, current UVA parent
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Believe what you want, but I’ve seen firsthand that good students at lower performing schools are getting accepted to colleges that they probably wouldn’t get into if they went to a higher tier, more competitive FCPS school. They stand out. Yes, most of their graduating class go to work, community college, or trade schools but those who aim for college do very well.
Students from lower-performing schools often face significant challenges when they reach competitive colleges, such as Ivy League institutions or UVA. For example, the top golfer at Justice High School likely wouldn't outperform even the lowest-ranked golfer at Langley High School. People often downplay the impact of wealth and academic resources, but these factors play a major role in the gap between high- and low-performing schools. Just saying.
Sure, this could be true in some areas, but the wealthier and/or smarter kids at Justice who perform well on standardized tests are just as capeable as those with similar scores from “prestigious” schools, despite having attended the lower rated ones. So, calling certain fcps schools prestigious is just another way of saying that the parents are rich. It’s not that the quality/rigor is different from other schools. Now, the cut-throat competition might be seen a motivator for students to push themselves. In my view, it’s not a healthy environment for my teenager, but to each their own.
Many choose to sacrifice, be house-poor to make sure their kids got to hang out with wealthier families, that’s their choice. Some of us chose to have extra money saved up for emergencies, college tuition, retirement, etc… and our kids attend one of those “scary” high schools.
Also, nobody will care where your kid went to high school when they are job hunting.
-Signed, current UVA parent
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Believe what you want, but I’ve seen firsthand that good students at lower performing schools are getting accepted to colleges that they probably wouldn’t get into if they went to a higher tier, more competitive FCPS school. They stand out. Yes, most of their graduating class go to work, community college, or trade schools but those who aim for college do very well.
Students from lower-performing schools often face significant challenges when they reach competitive colleges, such as Ivy League institutions or UVA. For example, the top golfer at Justice High School likely wouldn't outperform even the lowest-ranked golfer at Langley High School. People often downplay the impact of wealth and academic resources, but these factors play a major role in the gap between high- and low-performing schools. Just saying.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Believe what you want, but I’ve seen firsthand that good students at lower performing schools are getting accepted to colleges that they probably wouldn’t get into if they went to a higher tier, more competitive FCPS school. They stand out. Yes, most of their graduating class go to work, community college, or trade schools but those who aim for college do very well.
Students from lower-performing schools often face significant challenges when they reach competitive colleges, such as Ivy League institutions or UVA. For example, the top golfer at Justice High School likely wouldn't outperform even the lowest-ranked golfer at Langley High School. People often downplay the impact of wealth and academic resources, but these factors play a major role in the gap between high- and low-performing schools. Just saying.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Believe what you want, but I’ve seen firsthand that good students at lower performing schools are getting accepted to colleges that they probably wouldn’t get into if they went to a higher tier, more competitive FCPS school. They stand out. Yes, most of their graduating class go to work, community college, or trade schools but those who aim for college do very well.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
They also send students to UVA, Va Tech, William & Mary, Johns Hopkins, Penn, Yale, etc. in numbers greater than one would think. It’s easier for good students to stand out at smaller, lower performing schools, and the students probably have compelling stories that AO’s like.
Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
They also send students to UVA, Va Tech, William & Mary, Johns Hopkins, Penn, Yale, etc. in numbers greater than one would think. It’s easier for good students to stand out at smaller, lower performing schools, and the students probably have compelling stories that AO’s like.
Nah, suburban myth. Admissions from lower performing schools are underwhelming, even with the success stories. What's exceptional at the lower performing schools is routine at higher performing schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Much of this conversation is totally absurd given the fact that many students from “high performing” schools and “low performing” schools are accepted into the same colleges/universities.
Actually, students from low performing schools seem to have an advantage when applying to competitive colleges and universities.
Not at all. The bottom feeders mostly send kids to NVCC, GMU, and VCU.
They also send students to UVA, Va Tech, William & Mary, Johns Hopkins, Penn, Yale, etc. in numbers greater than one would think. It’s easier for good students to stand out at smaller, lower performing schools, and the students probably have compelling stories that AO’s like.