Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course, it signals full pay.

Why would it need to "signal" anything?

Need aware schools get all the finance info and the small number of need blind/meet full need schools don't consider.

Yes but full pay is more complicated than that. They are looking for other signals.
Schools are looking for potential donors/ speakers/ networkers or ppl who will employ graduates. We are seeing how hard it is for grads to get jobs…

Our college counselor said it was important for both parents to have updated LinkedIn with clear senior leadership/executive titles conveyed in job titles in common app.

The signaling is very important for AO (many of who do look at LinkedIn after 1st pass). The $$$ privilege may not hurt at all at certain private colleges and can actually help.

Please name which schools look at these factors. Or is this the rumor mill?

It’s pretty easy to figure out if you parse through data….

Vanderbilt; Rice; Cornell; Dartmouth; WashU

Look at the % of admitted students in the top 1% of HHI (or better top 0.5% of HHI if they break it down that far). Vanderbilt; Dartmouth & WashU make sense.

But isn’t this thread about advantages for boarding school students? Some boarding schools are feeders. Not shocking news.

Again you are saying "look at these numbers" without any direct evidence or even a logic chain.

At best this is a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.

There is no evidence need blind schools make admissions decisions based on economics.

Wow. That Reddit link makes a crazy case for his income/wealth subtly impact admissions decisions.

“I also think that if there was any doubt beforehand, this further magnifies the questionable priorities that many of these institutions have. I was just at Yales admitted students days and I was surprised how it felt like one in every three or four people I met went to one of the big NE boarding schools...”

Sigh... no one doubts the stats show wealthy students are over-represented at elite schools. It's because they have every advantage and make better candidates independent of their ability to pay tuition. They are a self-selecting sample.

The question is will an admissions officer at a need blind college admit one student over another because of the "signal" that they will be full pay.

The answer remains "No".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course, it signals full pay.

Why would it need to "signal" anything?

Need aware schools get all the finance info and the small number of need blind/meet full need schools don't consider.

Yes but full pay is more complicated than that. They are looking for other signals.
Schools are looking for potential donors/ speakers/ networkers or ppl who will employ graduates. We are seeing how hard it is for grads to get jobs…

Our college counselor said it was important for both parents to have updated LinkedIn with clear senior leadership/executive titles conveyed in job titles in common app.

The signaling is very important for AO (many of who do look at LinkedIn after 1st pass). The $$$ privilege may not hurt at all at certain private colleges and can actually help.

Please name which schools look at these factors. Or is this the rumor mill?

It’s pretty easy to figure out if you parse through data….

Vanderbilt; Rice; Cornell; Dartmouth; WashU

Np.
There are some crazy stats in this post: Where the elite study: The
T30 for Selective Prep School
Matriculants

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/s/cbRm13RkEp

Private college admissions & private high schools:
Historically, by forming relationships with guidance counselors at wealthier high schools, colleges could be statistically sure that on average, and over time, they would receive a more affluent applicant pool, which made it easier to stretch their financial aid budgets.

this is important bc beginning in the 1990s college administrators decided it would be good marketing for them to financially support all admitted students, but it's easier to keep that promise when the financial need of the class is low, or at least trends steadily year to year.

this is why you didn't see many recruiting trips of elite college AOs to very low-income parts of the country - not because it's a bad idea, but because it would put extra strain on the financial aid pool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course, it signals full pay.

Why would it need to "signal" anything?

Need aware schools get all the finance info and the small number of need blind/meet full need schools don't consider.

Yes but full pay is more complicated than that. They are looking for other signals.
Schools are looking for potential donors/ speakers/ networkers or ppl who will employ graduates. We are seeing how hard it is for grads to get jobs…

Our college counselor said it was important for both parents to have updated LinkedIn with clear senior leadership/executive titles conveyed in job titles in common app.

The signaling is very important for AO (many of who do look at LinkedIn after 1st pass). The $$$ privilege may not hurt at all at certain private colleges and can actually help.

Please name which schools look at these factors. Or is this the rumor mill?

It’s pretty easy to figure out if you parse through data….

Vanderbilt; Rice; Cornell; Dartmouth; WashU

Look at the % of admitted students in the top 1% of HHI (or better top 0.5% of HHI if they break it down that far). Vanderbilt; Dartmouth & WashU make sense.

But isn’t this thread about advantages for boarding school students? Some boarding schools are feeders. Not shocking news.

Again you are saying "look at these numbers" without any direct evidence or even a logic chain.

At best this is a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.

There is no evidence need blind schools make admissions decisions based on economics.

Wow. That Reddit link makes a crazy case for his income/wealth subtly impact admissions decisions.

“I also think that if there was any doubt beforehand, this further magnifies the questionable priorities that many of these institutions have. I was just at Yales admitted students days and I was surprised how it felt like one in every three or four people I met went to one of the big NE boarding schools...”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course, it signals full pay.

Why would it need to "signal" anything?

Need aware schools get all the finance info and the small number of need blind/meet full need schools don't consider.

Yes but full pay is more complicated than that. They are looking for other signals.
Schools are looking for potential donors/ speakers/ networkers or ppl who will employ graduates. We are seeing how hard it is for grads to get jobs…

Our college counselor said it was important for both parents to have updated LinkedIn with clear senior leadership/executive titles conveyed in job titles in common app.

The signaling is very important for AO (many of who do look at LinkedIn after 1st pass). The $$$ privilege may not hurt at all at certain private colleges and can actually help.

Please name which schools look at these factors. Or is this the rumor mill?

It’s pretty easy to figure out if you parse through data….

Vanderbilt; Rice; Cornell; Dartmouth; WashU

Np.
There are some crazy stats in this post: Where the elite study: The
T30 for Selective Prep School
Matriculants

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/s/cbRm13RkEp

Anonymous wrote:Tops like Choate, PEA, etc.

Some good stuff on this in other places:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/s/Qf6jTjYv5H

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/s/Pf9jMno1h3

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/s/fq4I9KIv9X

Do you think going to an American school abroad could be a hook, say somewhere in UK?

I totally understand the previous poster about wanting child to have an environment where air wasn’t sucked out. Have a bit of that here too. I’m certain other very good reasons as well.

I am nosey though, are there many families that seem like they just want to more hands-off? How prevalent is that? I know it’s more common in other parts of the world and doesn’t have a negative connotation.

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Who in their right mind sends their middle or high schooler to boarding school? A parent who prefers to mostly not participate in their kids formative years?

It’s right for the right kind of candidate. Clearly not your kid.

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. Who in their right mind sends their middle or high schooler to boarding school? A parent who prefers to mostly not participate in their kids formative years?

Serious response. DD went in 9th grade due to her brothers ASD and needs. He sucked all the energy out of the house. She deserves a formative childhood/teen experience that is not dominated by him.

She is happy and thriving at BS. We speak/text multiple times a day. I know more about her classes, friends, and sports than my friends do about their kids.

Your “serious question” and comment about a parent not wanting to participate in their kids formative years is just judgmental. Boarding school might not be right for your family but that doesn’t give you permission to say that parents who do feel it is right are wrong.

Serious question. Who in their right mind sends their middle or high schooler to boarding school? A parent who prefers to mostly not participate in their kids formative years?

Now it's getting all complicated. Either we play up our intellectual and financial abilities or we downplay them... I think everyone is better off being themselves and accepting the results.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unrelatedly, has anyone heard that AOs look at the colleges where the parents went?

Is that ever relevant at all?

Very relevant. Same with siblings college.
Usually helpful to show intellectual horsepower.

Job titles say a lot more about intellectual abilities than educational history.

Anonymous wrote:Unrelatedly, has anyone heard that AOs look at the colleges where the parents went?

Is that ever relevant at all?

Very relevant. Same with siblings college.
Usually helpful to show intellectual horsepower.

Anonymous wrote:I heard it helped get kids off of waitlists this year. For example, Georgetown calls Andover and says, “who will commit today and doesn’t need to see a financial aid package?” And Andover tells them.

There was a lot of waitlist movement this year. That doesn’t necessarily mean it will happen next year, though.

Ofc.
This happens at many private HS though. But maybe more at boarding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PEA, Andover, St Grottlesex, and others at that tier do place more students per year into Ivys and T20s, but it is very unclear to me how much it is due to the school and how much it is due to parents who are alums from the college the student is applying to.

But more often than not these days, these kids are going to schools where the parents did not go. Still very good schools but maybe not Ivy (or at least not Yale).

How do you explain that? Does anyone have links to all of these boarding school Instagram sites?

Donor and athletics. Boarding schools recruit in the same way colleges do. You also have athletes doing 13th grade in boarding school to become better recruits

It’s called a PG year….everyone from our day school who does a PG year goes to Harvard or Yale or Dartmouth.