Anonymous wrote:^^ it's correlated with socioeconomics!

Anonymous wrote:I remember back in 1952, when St. Olaf's most active volcano threatened to erupt. Luckily, there were some Druid priests who were in town for the opening of Stonehengeland. They said they could stop it if they could sacrifice the town's dumbest virgin. I don't know why I raised my hand. It must have just been the excitement of the moment. But they said the only way to prevent the eruption was for me to crawl through their legs, up the volcano, while they gave me my birthday whacks. Well - and you're not gonna believe this - it turns out they weren't Druid priests at all. Just a bunch of Shriners looking for a good time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only parents who think St Olaf and Carleton students are on the same page intellectually are those who know their kids would never get into Carleton. Stop kidding yourselves. Yes, St Olaf is a good school -- but it ain't in Carleton's league and never will be.

So rude. Do better.

--Carleton grad

And you know I'm right.

-- Not a Carleton grad

And for some sad reason, that seems to haunt you...

LOL, hardly. I had a kid who was torn between going to Carleton for full tuition or Grinnell with a generous merit aid package. It really came down to the wire before the kid decided to go with Grinnell, which proved to be a great decision both from a "fit" and practical standpoint. The kid actually preferred Grinnell from the very beginning and the decision would have been an easier one had the kid not been a little too caught up in the rankings at the time.

St Olaf wasn't on the radar.

One nice thing about bring connected to one of the Northfield colleges is that there is really very little rivalry between them. It's kind of annoying to have people unconnected to the two come into the thread and be combative and argumentative about the possible differences between the two. Maybe you could go pick some fights about Grinnell vs. some of its neighrbors.

Interesting to hear you say that considering that, at least according to Wikipedia, Carleton considers St Olaf to be its biggest athletic rival.

I have a student currently at Carleton. It's a friendly sports rivalry. I've never heard my kid say any negative thing about St. Olaf students. The invite each other to some campus events (like concerts or get out the vote kind of stuff) and similar campus groups/clubs follow each other on social media and that kind of thing. Lots of Oles and Carls have siblings at the other school or parents/family who attended. It's annoying that posters here are so obsessed with rankings because that is not really the ethos of either of those schools. The kids all know that St. Olaf is less selective, but so what? It's still a terrific school in and of itself so who cares if the students there missed like 5 more questions on the SAT or got a couple Bs instead of As in high school.

Well, according to the most recent statistics the mid 50 percent SAT range for Carleton is 1440-1530 and for St Olaf it's 1240-1420. In other words, middle 50 percent in each school don't even overlap at the low end of Carleton. That's probably more than 5 questions.

DP: Actually, once you're in the top 20% of scores (e.g. roughly about 1230+) the differences in scores are really just a handful. But the point being, in this ranking system mentality people are acting like these differences are super meaningful. Just because there objective, consistent, distinctions in these particular measures of academic achievement (I wouldn't go so far to say "smartness" as that is a much wider, fuzzier category) doesn't make them meaningful differences in things we care about in quality of education. I think that's all the PP is getting at.

The only people who say they don't care about that kind of stuff are parents of kids who don't have the scores. Otherwise you'd see lots of kids with really high scores in every school, and you don't.

Huh? Your logic escapes me. My kid got a 1460. I really just don't think he's that much smarter than his friend who got a 1340. Got a few more questions right. I would be more tempted to believe he is less hard-working than his friends who got 1500+ because he took it one time and decided it was good enough, whereas they got lower scores initially but buckled down on prep to get a higher score. But his was high enough for his first choice school so maybe he's just more strategic.

See, here's the thing. Just because you 'think" something based on the anecdotal experience of your one kid and a few of his friends doesn't make it universally true. So, it's your "logic" that is suspect.

But isn't that what you did when you said "the only people who say that they don't care about that kind of stuff are parents of kids who don't have the scores..." I offered a negative example...which is how in logic you negate an overblown claim like that.

Anonymous wrote:^^ it's correlated with socioeconomics!

Anonymous wrote:You can be "every bit as smart" and still not do so well on a standardized test. That's what I was referring to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only parents who think St Olaf and Carleton students are on the same page intellectually are those who know their kids would never get into Carleton. Stop kidding yourselves. Yes, St Olaf is a good school -- but it ain't in Carleton's league and never will be.

So rude. Do better.

--Carleton grad

And you know I'm right.

-- Not a Carleton grad

And for some sad reason, that seems to haunt you...

LOL, hardly. I had a kid who was torn between going to Carleton for full tuition or Grinnell with a generous merit aid package. It really came down to the wire before the kid decided to go with Grinnell, which proved to be a great decision both from a "fit" and practical standpoint. The kid actually preferred Grinnell from the very beginning and the decision would have been an easier one had the kid not been a little too caught up in the rankings at the time.

St Olaf wasn't on the radar.

One nice thing about bring connected to one of the Northfield colleges is that there is really very little rivalry between them. It's kind of annoying to have people unconnected to the two come into the thread and be combative and argumentative about the possible differences between the two. Maybe you could go pick some fights about Grinnell vs. some of its neighrbors.

Interesting to hear you say that considering that, at least according to Wikipedia, Carleton considers St Olaf to be its biggest athletic rival.

I have a student currently at Carleton. It's a friendly sports rivalry. I've never heard my kid say any negative thing about St. Olaf students. The invite each other to some campus events (like concerts or get out the vote kind of stuff) and similar campus groups/clubs follow each other on social media and that kind of thing. Lots of Oles and Carls have siblings at the other school or parents/family who attended. It's annoying that posters here are so obsessed with rankings because that is not really the ethos of either of those schools. The kids all know that St. Olaf is less selective, but so what? It's still a terrific school in and of itself so who cares if the students there missed like 5 more questions on the SAT or got a couple Bs instead of As in high school.

Well, according to the most recent statistics the mid 50 percent SAT range for Carleton is 1440-1530 and for St Olaf it's 1240-1420. In other words, middle 50 percent in each school don't even overlap at the low end of Carleton. That's probably more than 5 questions.

DP: Actually, once you're in the top 20% of scores (e.g. roughly about 1230+) the differences in scores are really just a handful. But the point being, in this ranking system mentality people are acting like these differences are super meaningful. Just because there objective, consistent, distinctions in these particular measures of academic achievement (I wouldn't go so far to say "smartness" as that is a much wider, fuzzier category) doesn't make them meaningful differences in things we care about in quality of education. I think that's all the PP is getting at.

The only people who say they don't care about that kind of stuff are parents of kids who don't have the scores. Otherwise you'd see lots of kids with really high scores in every school, and you don't.

Huh? Your logic escapes me. My kid got a 1460. I really just don't think he's that much smarter than his friend who got a 1340. Got a few more questions right. I would be more tempted to believe he is less hard-working than his friends who got 1500+ because he took it one time and decided it was good enough, whereas they got lower scores initially but buckled down on prep to get a higher score. But his was high enough for his first choice school so maybe he's just more strategic.

See, here's the thing. Just because you 'think" something based on the anecdotal experience of your one kid and a few of his friends doesn't make it universally true. So, it's your "logic" that is suspect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only parents who think St Olaf and Carleton students are on the same page intellectually are those who know their kids would never get into Carleton. Stop kidding yourselves. Yes, St Olaf is a good school -- but it ain't in Carleton's league and never will be.

So rude. Do better.

--Carleton grad

And you know I'm right.

-- Not a Carleton grad

And for some sad reason, that seems to haunt you...

LOL, hardly. I had a kid who was torn between going to Carleton for full tuition or Grinnell with a generous merit aid package. It really came down to the wire before the kid decided to go with Grinnell, which proved to be a great decision both from a "fit" and practical standpoint. The kid actually preferred Grinnell from the very beginning and the decision would have been an easier one had the kid not been a little too caught up in the rankings at the time.

St Olaf wasn't on the radar.

One nice thing about bring connected to one of the Northfield colleges is that there is really very little rivalry between them. It's kind of annoying to have people unconnected to the two come into the thread and be combative and argumentative about the possible differences between the two. Maybe you could go pick some fights about Grinnell vs. some of its neighrbors.

Interesting to hear you say that considering that, at least according to Wikipedia, Carleton considers St Olaf to be its biggest athletic rival.

I have a student currently at Carleton. It's a friendly sports rivalry. I've never heard my kid say any negative thing about St. Olaf students. The invite each other to some campus events (like concerts or get out the vote kind of stuff) and similar campus groups/clubs follow each other on social media and that kind of thing. Lots of Oles and Carls have siblings at the other school or parents/family who attended. It's annoying that posters here are so obsessed with rankings because that is not really the ethos of either of those schools. The kids all know that St. Olaf is less selective, but so what? It's still a terrific school in and of itself so who cares if the students there missed like 5 more questions on the SAT or got a couple Bs instead of As in high school.

Well, according to the most recent statistics the mid 50 percent SAT range for Carleton is 1440-1530 and for St Olaf it's 1240-1420. In other words, middle 50 percent in each school don't even overlap at the low end of Carleton. That's probably more than 5 questions.

DP: Actually, once you're in the top 20% of scores (e.g. roughly about 1230+) the differences in scores are really just a handful. But the point being, in this ranking system mentality people are acting like these differences are super meaningful. Just because there objective, consistent, distinctions in these particular measures of academic achievement (I wouldn't go so far to say "smartness" as that is a much wider, fuzzier category) doesn't make them meaningful differences in things we care about in quality of education. I think that's all the PP is getting at.

The only people who say they don't care about that kind of stuff are parents of kids who don't have the scores. Otherwise you'd see lots of kids with really high scores in every school, and you don't.

Huh? Your logic escapes me. My kid got a 1460. I really just don't think he's that much smarter than his friend who got a 1340. Got a few more questions right. I would be more tempted to believe he is less hard-working than his friends who got 1500+ because he took it one time and decided it was good enough, whereas they got lower scores initially but buckled down on prep to get a higher score. But his was high enough for his first choice school so maybe he's just more strategic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only parents who think St Olaf and Carleton students are on the same page intellectually are those who know their kids would never get into Carleton. Stop kidding yourselves. Yes, St Olaf is a good school -- but it ain't in Carleton's league and never will be.

So rude. Do better.

--Carleton grad

And you know I'm right.

-- Not a Carleton grad

And for some sad reason, that seems to haunt you...

LOL, hardly. I had a kid who was torn between going to Carleton for full tuition or Grinnell with a generous merit aid package. It really came down to the wire before the kid decided to go with Grinnell, which proved to be a great decision both from a "fit" and practical standpoint. The kid actually preferred Grinnell from the very beginning and the decision would have been an easier one had the kid not been a little too caught up in the rankings at the time.

St Olaf wasn't on the radar.

One nice thing about bring connected to one of the Northfield colleges is that there is really very little rivalry between them. It's kind of annoying to have people unconnected to the two come into the thread and be combative and argumentative about the possible differences between the two. Maybe you could go pick some fights about Grinnell vs. some of its neighrbors.

Interesting to hear you say that considering that, at least according to Wikipedia, Carleton considers St Olaf to be its biggest athletic rival.

I have a student currently at Carleton. It's a friendly sports rivalry. I've never heard my kid say any negative thing about St. Olaf students. The invite each other to some campus events (like concerts or get out the vote kind of stuff) and similar campus groups/clubs follow each other on social media and that kind of thing. Lots of Oles and Carls have siblings at the other school or parents/family who attended. It's annoying that posters here are so obsessed with rankings because that is not really the ethos of either of those schools. The kids all know that St. Olaf is less selective, but so what? It's still a terrific school in and of itself so who cares if the students there missed like 5 more questions on the SAT or got a couple Bs instead of As in high school.

Well, according to the most recent statistics the mid 50 percent SAT range for Carleton is 1440-1530 and for St Olaf it's 1240-1420. In other words, middle 50 percent in each school don't even overlap at the low end of Carleton. That's probably more than 5 questions.

DP: Actually, once you're in the top 20% of scores (e.g. roughly about 1230+) the differences in scores are really just a handful. But the point being, in this ranking system mentality people are acting like these differences are super meaningful. Just because there objective, consistent, distinctions in these particular measures of academic achievement (I wouldn't go so far to say "smartness" as that is a much wider, fuzzier category) doesn't make them meaningful differences in things we care about in quality of education. I think that's all the PP is getting at.

The only people who say they don't care about that kind of stuff are parents of kids who don't have the scores. Otherwise you'd see lots of kids with really high scores in every school, and you don't.