Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GDS parent who does lots of interviews for my Ivy alma mater here. All of the schools mentioned here are great and the students are all really impressive and very well prepared for an elite college. The odds of your child getting in to an Ivy are pretty much the same whether they go to SFS, StA/NCS, GDS, Holton, Potomac, etc. Unfortunately, most of the applicants are rejected by HYP. You can obsess over the tiny differences between the schools and the minute variables of admission, but they don't really add up to much. And remember, your child will probably have as great a life if they go to UMd or UVa as they would if they go to Stanford or Yale.

+1. GDS!

Anonymous wrote:GDS parent who does lots of interviews for my Ivy alma mater here. All of the schools mentioned here are great and the students are all really impressive and very well prepared for an elite college. The odds of your child getting in to an Ivy are pretty much the same whether they go to SFS, StA/NCS, GDS, Holton, Potomac, etc. Unfortunately, most of the applicants are rejected by HYP. You can obsess over the tiny differences between the schools and the minute variables of admission, but they don't really add up to much. And remember, your child will probably have as great a life if they go to UMd or UVa as they would if they go to Stanford or Yale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:C'mon, people. The college placement track record of any elite high school full of the offspring of upper income, well connected, highly educated super parents is hardly a measure of anything. That's called born on third base. If your going to revel in the results, at least recognize the incredible advantages that most of these kids had from day one.

True up to a point, and valid if you're comparing apples to oranges. But when making an apples-apples comparison of elite Washington independent schools where certain students have the characteristics you mention, it seems that one or two schools return consistently superior performance.

Anonymous wrote:C'mon, people. The college placement track record of any elite high school full of the offspring of upper income, well connected, highly educated super parents is hardly a measure of anything. That's called born on third base. If your going to revel in the results, at least recognize the incredible advantages that most of these kids had from day one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is just starting to sound like a lot of whining from folks who feel their children deserve a spot an an elite school and resent everyone else who they perceive as having it easier. Get a grip. If your DC is an academic high flyer, they will do fine wherever they go to school. Focus on supporting your child to reach their goals in life, not trying to get someone else to validate your worth.

Your assumption that the people you are whining about don't have kids who got into elite schools is incorrect, at least in my case. This is just a discussion about college admissions and how they work. Nobody is expressing resentment. If your kid is hooked, good for them. That's great. Other people don't necessarily resent them, but they do want to know what the odds are in ED/EA vs RD for their unhooked kids, and it's a bit confusing if you are new to the game.

So then what is the GDS secret sauce for its Ivy League admissions record? If it that many of the students have legacy hooks or do kids just outperform the general applicant pool from other independent schools?

They have an extremely good and well connected college counselling office.

And a good PR team who really know their way around social media.

It's hard to argue with success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is just starting to sound like a lot of whining from folks who feel their children deserve a spot an an elite school and resent everyone else who they perceive as having it easier. Get a grip. If your DC is an academic high flyer, they will do fine wherever they go to school. Focus on supporting your child to reach their goals in life, not trying to get someone else to validate your worth.

Your assumption that the people you are whining about don't have kids who got into elite schools is incorrect, at least in my case. This is just a discussion about college admissions and how they work. Nobody is expressing resentment. If your kid is hooked, good for them. That's great. Other people don't necessarily resent them, but they do want to know what the odds are in ED/EA vs RD for their unhooked kids, and it's a bit confusing if you are new to the game.

So then what is the GDS secret sauce for its Ivy League admissions record? If it that many of the students have legacy hooks or do kids just outperform the general applicant pool from other independent schools?

They have an extremely good and well connected college counselling office.

And a good PR team who really know their way around social media.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is just starting to sound like a lot of whining from folks who feel their children deserve a spot an an elite school and resent everyone else who they perceive as having it easier. Get a grip. If your DC is an academic high flyer, they will do fine wherever they go to school. Focus on supporting your child to reach their goals in life, not trying to get someone else to validate your worth.

Your assumption that the people you are whining about don't have kids who got into elite schools is incorrect, at least in my case. This is just a discussion about college admissions and how they work. Nobody is expressing resentment. If your kid is hooked, good for them. That's great. Other people don't necessarily resent them, but they do want to know what the odds are in ED/EA vs RD for their unhooked kids, and it's a bit confusing if you are new to the game.

So then what is the GDS secret sauce for its Ivy League admissions record? If it that many of the students have legacy hooks or do kids just outperform the general applicant pool from other independent schools?

They have an extremely good and well connected college counselling office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is just starting to sound like a lot of whining from folks who feel their children deserve a spot an an elite school and resent everyone else who they perceive as having it easier. Get a grip. If your DC is an academic high flyer, they will do fine wherever they go to school. Focus on supporting your child to reach their goals in life, not trying to get someone else to validate your worth.

Your assumption that the people you are whining about don't have kids who got into elite schools is incorrect, at least in my case. This is just a discussion about college admissions and how they work. Nobody is expressing resentment. If your kid is hooked, good for them. That's great. Other people don't necessarily resent them, but they do want to know what the odds are in ED/EA vs RD for their unhooked kids, and it's a bit confusing if you are new to the game.

So then what is the GDS secret sauce for its Ivy League admissions record? If it that many of the students have legacy hooks or do kids just outperform the general applicant pool from other independent schools?

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell had something like 8 kids to Penn and 10 to Yale (or the other way around) this year. That's not too shabby either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wealthier than athletes from non Ivy schools, I am sure, but not likely more wealthy than the student body as a whole, which I believe is the reference in the PP.

No, athletes overall. I went back and checked The Price of Admission:

"...contrary to the stereotype, varsity athletes at elite colleges are more homogeneous, both racially and socioeconomically, than the student bodies as a whole."

Good data and studies are cited to back the statement up. This is because colleges recruit from elite sports, like skiing, polo, crew, fencing, golf, etc.

Combined, all of the sports that you reference have fewer recruited athletes than football alone, and homogeneous does not mean wealthier. Perhaps less ethnically diverse and regionally more focused, but not necessarily wealthier. To quote directly from the Harvard website on athletic recruiting:

"The majority of the Harvard football team receives a high level of scholarship."

Actually, wealthier is exactly what the author means. He is quite clear about that and gives specific examples. You are wrong about the number of football players vs other athletes, too. Google Title IX, for starters.

Aware of Title IX, thanks. Clearly not comparing football to all other sports, but to the 5 preppy sports mentioned by the poster. The bulk of the athletes at a school like Harvard are in fact in football, swimming, track and field, hockey, basketball, volleyball, wrestling, softball, baseball, and lacrosse and not the country-club 5. Final point, Golden is a hack and I am surprised that you are relying on his journalism as gospel.