Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K-8 schools should be graded on the same scale as K-12 schools. Some of the K-8 schools prepare their kids so well that they often become top of their class in high school. People are starting to see the real benefit of K-8 and that’s one of the reasons why it was extremely competitive (especially all-boys) this year.

Which would be the “TT” K8? In terms of exmissions, academics and competitive to gain admission. I can only think of St B and maybe Buckley

St B sounds right

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's clear.

It’s really not; if you’re smart enough to keep up at Trinity, you can go to a lower tier private or a public school, be in the top 10% of your class, do 2 hours a night if homework instead of 4, use the extra 2 hours to pad out your extracurriculars and/or simply enjoy being a teenager, and have pretty much the same odds of getting into Harvard that you would have had at Trinity.

The “pressure cooker” thing is about internal competition - colleges don’t give you much credit for it, because most kids don’t go to those sorts of schools and can’t be faulted for not enduring a similar workload.

So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

no. not unless an athletic recruit. for athletes, there are reasons for going to an easier school

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:K-8 schools should be graded on the same scale as K-12 schools. Some of the K-8 schools prepare their kids so well that they often become top of their class in high school. People are starting to see the real benefit of K-8 and that’s one of the reasons why it was extremely competitive (especially all-boys) this year.

Which would be the “TT” K8? In terms of exmissions, academics and competitive to gain admission. I can only think of St B and maybe Buckley

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This may be the dumbest thing I've read on here.

Why? Because most kids actually can afford a private school or because most TT private schools do not in fact turn away far more qualified applicants than they accept?

I know people who send their kids to Trinity don't *like* to think that their admission there was a lottery ticket and that the only reason their kid is spending 4 hours a night doing homework is so they can edge out the other kids doing 4 hours a night of homework for the handful of Harvard acceptances, but it's true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, even at Browning you aren’t going to have a super happy adolescence if you choose to gun for Harvard, assuming unconnected. You’ll just be surrounded by happier peers.

Different era, but I was a top-performing student at a thoroughly meh private school, it didn't even particularly occur to me to apply to Harvard until spring of my junior year, and I still got in. And I don't get the impression most kids of my generation spent their entire HS careers working towards Harvard. My freshman roommates were two public school kids - one from a not particularly good NYC public (though they were very bright and had an interesting life story) - and a kid from a meh boarding school; we ended up with one Stuy kid and one HM kid in our blocking group and neither of them was among the smarter members of our blocking group.

Anonymous wrote:She's completely and utterly wrong.

Anonymous wrote:This may be the dumbest thing I've read on here.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, even at Browning you aren’t going to have a super happy adolescence if you choose to gun for Harvard, assuming unconnected. You’ll just be surrounded by happier peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's clear.

It’s really not; if you’re smart enough to keep up at Trinity, you can go to a lower tier private or a public school, be in the top 10% of your class, do 2 hours a night if homework instead of 4, use the extra 2 hours to pad out your extracurriculars and/or simply enjoy being a teenager, and have pretty much the same odds of getting into Harvard that you would have had at Trinity.

The “pressure cooker” thing is about internal competition - colleges don’t give you much credit for it, because most kids don’t go to those sorts of schools and can’t be faulted for not enduring a similar workload.

So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

Anonymous wrote:Given that most kids can’t afford private school, and that TT private schools turn away far more qualified applicants than they accept and do so for mostly arbitrary/random reasons, it would be downright irrational for a college admissions office to attach any great significance to whether or not someone attended one of those schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's clear.

It’s really not; if you’re smart enough to keep up at Trinity, you can go to a lower tier private or a public school, be in the top 10% of your class, do 2 hours a night if homework instead of 4, use the extra 2 hours to pad out your extracurriculars and/or simply enjoy being a teenager, and have pretty much the same odds of getting into Harvard that you would have had at Trinity.

The “pressure cooker” thing is about internal competition - colleges don’t give you much credit for it, because most kids don’t go to those sorts of schools and can’t be faulted for not enduring a similar workload.

So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

Yes, and they'll probably have a happier adolescence at Browning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's clear.

It’s really not; if you’re smart enough to keep up at Trinity, you can go to a lower tier private or a public school, be in the top 10% of your class, do 2 hours a night if homework instead of 4, use the extra 2 hours to pad out your extracurriculars and/or simply enjoy being a teenager, and have pretty much the same odds of getting into Harvard that you would have had at Trinity.

The “pressure cooker” thing is about internal competition - colleges don’t give you much credit for it, because most kids don’t go to those sorts of schools and can’t be faulted for not enduring a similar workload.

So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

Anonymous wrote:So you’re saying for a really strong student, their odds of getting into Harvard are the same from Trinity as they are from Browning?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's clear.

It’s really not; if you’re smart enough to keep up at Trinity, you can go to a lower tier private or a public school, be in the top 10% of your class, do 2 hours a night if homework instead of 4, use the extra 2 hours to pad out your extracurriculars and/or simply enjoy being a teenager, and have pretty much the same odds of getting into Harvard that you would have had at Trinity.

The “pressure cooker” thing is about internal competition - colleges don’t give you much credit for it, because most kids don’t go to those sorts of schools and can’t be faulted for not enduring a similar workload.