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:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Admissions to Ivy League colleges, especially in the context of legacy admissions, do not say much about the quality of the school. But of course, you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

And you are free to believe whatever makes you feel better about not being able to send your children to an elite private school. You’re completely delusional if you think all of Sidwell’s Ivy admits are legacies (or recruited athletes). As I said before—pure cope.

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:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Admissions to Ivy League colleges, especially in the context of legacy admissions, do not say much about the quality of the school. But of course, you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

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:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Admissions to Ivy League colleges, especially in the context of legacy admissions, do not say much about the quality of the school. But of course, you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

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:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

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:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

I’m not bragging…just stating facts. Your envious response, however, is full of lies and cope.

According to your logic, every Ivy admit at TJ is a non-legacy (because they all attend Sidwell). 😝

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Let me rephrase that: This year, Sidwell had more hooked applicants admitted to Ivy League colleges through legacy admissions. Now you can continue bragging

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

This year, Sidwell is sending more students to Ivies and Ivy+ schools than TJ (based on percentage). According to this years’ IG posts, Sidwell is almost sending as many students to Ivies as TJ (based on numbers—there’s maybe a 2-3 student difference).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

They don't have higher percentage than the Magnets

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Exactly, when you have public magnets that are harder to get into than the elite private schools, but the elite private schools still have a higher percentage to the top colleges, that is the more accurate comparison...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

But your number analysis doesn’t reflect how elite DC publics and privates actually work. Yeah, there are 40 smart kids at elite prep and then 75 smart kids at public prep. It’s just not true at the very affluent rich public schools around here that there only 20 smart kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”

It’s honestly depressing how many private school advocates apparently cannot understand the question.

Let me simplify matters and attach some illustrative numbers.

Elite Prep, an independent high school, has a selective admissions process that selects for smart students. As a result, Elite Prep has 50 seniors, and all 50 of them are smart.

Nearby Public Prep has only 20 smart students, and a graduating class of 500.

Elite U. admits 40 smart students from Elite Prep and all 20 smart students from Public Prep.

The percent of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (80%) is much higher than the percent going from Public Prep to Elite U (4%).

Also, the number of students going from Elite Prep to Elite U (40) is higher than the number going from Public Prep to Elite U (20).

But, the chances that a given smart student gets into Elite U are higher from Public Prep (100%) than they are from Elite Prep (80%).

You see? That’s the question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are just as many if not more legacies in public schools than private schools.

Just as many in number, but not as a percentage.

That is the fundamental problem with this thread: no one can agree on whether they want a school that sends the LARGEST NUMBER of kids to Ivies or the school that sends the HIGHEST PERCENTAGE of kids to Ivies.

I think the problem is even more basic: individual people assuming their specific circumstances (or even just their perceptions) apply broadly. Maybe OP's children will have exactly the outcome that OP is predicting here, or maybe they'll have the opposite. But at the end of the day, it's just one example with many other variables in play.

My take: folks on DCUM (of course) fixate on outcomes for the top 5-10% of students. While I personally think my children are the best, I want to feel good with the middle 50% result wherever they go to high school. The non-Big 3 that is our top choice at the moment, all else aside, has an average college outcome that is leagues better than our zoned public high school. Maybe the top ten kids at that public HS have a better shot at Harvard or whatever, but it's illogical to choose a high school on the assumption that my kid will be in that group however many years from now.

I get this, but I honestly can’t imagine thinking my children would be in the middle 50% of literally any high school, no matter how selective or nonselective. I mean the bottom 20% of kids at JR don't go to college at all! A middling kid at SJC would almost certainly be above average at JR. And so forth.

Still, I think you’re also saying that families choose schools for overall fit and not just for college outcomes. Being an upward outlier can be helpful for college admissions and socially isolating at the same time. And social development in high school is also very important.

Also a kid who can thrive academically and hold leadership and the other things that matter outside of school to top colleges, while also managing life as a student at a large urban school shows they have more “grit” than those who attend “elite” smaller schools. They also are seen have a broader, less privileged, world perspective and colleges like that.

I know you believe this and want it to be the truth of how the world works, but it just isn’t born out by the numbers. Per capita and on a percentage basis, elite private school kids take up an insanely disproportionate number of slots at these tiny elite institutions. So, that’s not telling me that your gritty public school kid managing a large urban school has an “advantage.”