Anonymous wrote:Public school parent here. Sometimes I feel bad about my student not having gotten the type of education that kids at schools like Sidwell get. Then I read through threads like this one and THANK GOD that my kid wasn't in this type of toxic environment for the last few years, because:

1) my kid knows that their worth is not based on which college accepts them; and

2) we know that there are more than 7 great colleges out there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

I am a parent of a senior, though I don't gossip about kids' grades with my senior. Perhaps you know these kids well because your child is also in the top math/science cohort. That's awesome, really great, congrats. My point is that I agree they are top kids under anyone's definition, and I don't know why you are bring up all this extraneous information. No one is disagreeing with you. I still don't know what point it is that you are trying to make in the context of this discussion.

Because you said no perfect GPA. Just try to let you know this is not the fact. Sorry to make you feel offended when just simply pointed out your not so accurate statement. Also do you everyone takes the same humanity courses no matter your STEM OR NON STEM students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

I am a parent of a senior, though I don't gossip about kids' grades with my senior. Perhaps you know these kids well because your child is also in the top math/science cohort. That's awesome, really great, congrats. My point is that I agree they are top kids under anyone's definition, and I don't know why you are bring up all this extraneous information. No one is disagreeing with you. I still don't know what point it is that you are trying to make in the context of this discussion.

Because you said no perfect GPA. Just try to let you know this is not the fact. Sorry to make you feel offended when just simply pointed out your not so accurate statement. Also do you everyone takes the same humanity courses no matter your STEM OR NON STEM students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

I am a parent of a senior, though I don't gossip about kids' grades with my senior. Perhaps you know these kids well because your child is also in the top math/science cohort. That's awesome, really great, congrats. My point is that I agree they are top kids under anyone's definition, and I don't know why you are bring up all this extraneous information. No one is disagreeing with you. I still don't know what point it is that you are trying to make in the context of this discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Obviously you may not be a Sidwell parent. Or you may know different groups of the students. I know the student has GPA 3.98 and took most challenging math and science courses. The student only had 2 A-. I also know the student who took most challenging math but not science courses has perfect 4.0.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

The student you are describing is obviously a top student under anyone's definition, so I don't know why you are bringing up this whole most difficult math/science track in this context. And there's no reason for you to disparage other kids as taking "all easy courses" which is patently ridiculous. Last, there are almost no kids with a 4.0, whether they take your supposed "easy courses" or not. The grading in the humanities classes is also far from easy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

How do you define top students? I know one student who took most rigorous courses (both math and science) with almost 4.0 GPA didn’t get into any Ivy except for one WL. A lot of students think the student is top 4 although Sidwell neither ranks nor weights the difficulty of the courses. But most students know who are truly top students. High GPA with all easy courses are not comparable with the same high GPA but taking the most difficult math (III and IV) and science courses (Physics II)

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Sidwell CCO actually does a very good job. The brutal reality is they have the absolutely daunting task of telling the PARENTS of the bottom 85 percent of the class that there is no way in hell their kid is getting into the Ivy League. I believe they deliver that message but parents don’t “hear” it. Sadly, I think parents don’t accept the reality that their kid just isn’t a top student in a Sidwell context no matter how otherwise fabulous the kid might be. I am with you when it comes to undistinguished legacies who defy this reality. My observation is that top students with the most rigorous coursework (top 10 percent of class — top 13 students) got into top schools. This year. The next 40 percent got into top 50 schools. Sound and fury signifying nothing. Every single kid in the grade has a bright future. Sidwell parent of senior.

Sidwell's top 10% aren't getting into super selective colleges without a hook, just like any school in this area.

This is what puzzles me the most. If a top student has the best credentials, why is a hook necessary? Don't CCOs support candidates who have good chances to get into super selective colleges even without hooks?

Because in the year 2022 no-one is getting into the ivies on grades and courses alone. Not from Sidwell, STA, Thomas Jefferson, Blair Magnet, Dalton, Andover, etc.
Any CCO on the planet is not going to move this needle.

Gone are the days when you can just get in by being a kid with excellent grades in top courses at a rigorous school.
Kids need a hook, in most cases two PLUS the good grades for admission to an Ivy:

Hooks to be added to a baseline of good grades from a rigorous school: (pick any two): URM, legacy, VIP (parent or child), athlete, super advanced coursework, rare and/or ground-breaking extracurricular(s), etc