Anonymous wrote:Is there really an imbalance between supply and demand or is this perceived? I'm asking an honest question here. Is it that there are too few privates in general for the demand, or is it that too many families are clamoring the just a handful of the top schools based on perceived prestige? If its the latter, then the problem should sort itself out in that many talented students still can get into schools and the overall pool of talent in those schools just below the top tier will also get a lift.

The acceptance rate is fairly small. Many people want to go to few schools. Normally this is equilibrated through prices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do private colleges are now accountable and private schools not? Are they sacred cows?. What is the legal basis to treat two private entities differently? Is it ok to be race neutral in college admissions and not neutral in school admissions ?

Troll if you want but it will say a lot if you don’t provide a logical argument.

This might be news to you, but private entities that do not receive any govt funds, can discriminate all day long. Maybe they won’t do it because it’s not great PR but it certainly ain’t illegal.

Otherwise, all-boys and all-girls schools would also not be legal.

Your example is like saying that there are bathrooms for men and women, and hence you cannot complain about a man getting into a women’s bathroom. I agree with yet polciy.

Now more specifically, I also agree with all boys and girls schools. The advantage of the admission process in those schools is that it’s spelled out very explicitly the type of kids they admit; boy or girls plus additional characteristics. That’s very positive.

Now for co-ed school it would be nice to spell out very explicitly what is the criteria for admiission. Not mentioning here a formula or tests scores like many people interpret.

The underlying issue here is that the admission commute is trying to admit a portfolio of people with specific characteristics: wealth, talent, race, and gender. And the criteria is not fully disclosed. Many people are left out what was missing.

I would find more palatable a school that explicitly says that they admit rich families because we want mega donors.

Nothing against that. It’s just somehow that they do it but somehow pretend to be inclusive schools.

Don’t want to be too political. But I find similar to Trump that proposed tax cuts saying that they will benefit their base. There is some disconnect between the announced policies and the actual objectives.

Do well on your ISEE, SSAT, or HSPT if required, have good grades, get strong letters of recommendation, interview well (practice, practice, practice), write strong and creative essays that reveal your personality. Show an ability to get along with others, leadership or harmony, intellectual vitality, demonstrated commitment to the community, and talent in non-academic domains. This is what I understood to be the factors the schools are looking for. If you have a kindergartener rather than an upper schooler, then the scrutiny is partially on you as parents and not as much on the kid.

A benefit of private is that they can say no to difficult parents and poorly-behaved children. Advertising this would tick off the rejected families, which is why they don’t.

Is there really an imbalance between supply and demand or is this perceived? I'm asking an honest question here. Is it that there are too few privates in general for the demand, or is it that too many families are clamoring the just a handful of the top schools based on perceived prestige? If its the latter, then the problem should sort itself out in that many talented students still can get into schools and the overall pool of talent in those schools just below the top tier will also get a lift.

Anonymous wrote:It think the main issue is that there is an imbalance between demand and supply, that’s why many parents feel frustrated with the whole process.

It would be better situation to raise the tuition to 100k, in that way you get mostly megadonors (I presume that schools like that) and then provide full financial
Aid for diversity purposes.

With such a price, demand will equal supply, and many people that complaint about the admission process would not apply.

Currently the situation is closer to rationing. Where there is excess demand and the admission committee needs to decide among subjective criteria.

Raising the tuition will help tremendously to avoid a rationing situation.

+1

It think the main issue is that there is an imbalance between demand and supply, that’s why many parents feel frustrated with the whole process.

It would be better situation to raise the tuition to 100k, in that way you get mostly megadonors (I presume that schools like that) and then provide full financial
Aid for diversity purposes.

With such a price, demand will equal supply, and many people that complaint about the admission process would not apply.

Currently the situation is closer to rationing. Where there is excess demand and the admission committee needs to decide among subjective criteria.

Raising the tuition will help tremendously to avoid a rationing situation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do private colleges are now accountable and private schools not? Are they sacred cows?. What is the legal basis to treat two private entities differently? Is it ok to be race neutral in college admissions and not neutral in school admissions ?

Troll if you want but it will say a lot if you don’t provide a logical argument.

This might be news to you, but private entities that do not receive any govt funds, can discriminate all day long. Maybe they won’t do it because it’s not great PR but it certainly ain’t illegal.

The good thing is that the Supreme Court put a break on college admission discrimination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do private colleges are now accountable and private schools not? Are they sacred cows?. What is the legal basis to treat two private entities differently? Is it ok to be race neutral in college admissions and not neutral in school admissions ?

Troll if you want but it will say a lot if you don’t provide a logical argument.

This might be news to you, but private entities that do not receive any govt funds, can discriminate all day long. Maybe they won’t do it because it’s not great PR but it certainly ain’t illegal.

Otherwise, all-boys and all-girls schools would also not be legal.

Your example is like saying that there are bathrooms for men and women, and hence you cannot complain about a man getting into a women’s bathroom. I agree with yet polciy.

Now more specifically, I also agree with all boys and girls schools. The advantage of the admission process in those schools is that it’s spelled out very explicitly the type of kids they admit; boy or girls plus additional characteristics. That’s very positive.

Now for co-ed school it would be nice to spell out very explicitly what is the criteria for admiission. Not mentioning here a formula or tests scores like many people interpret.

The underlying issue here is that the admission commute is trying to admit a portfolio of people with specific characteristics: wealth, talent, race, and gender. And the criteria is not fully disclosed. Many people are left out what was missing.

I would find more palatable a school that explicitly says that they admit rich families because we want mega donors.

Nothing against that. It’s just somehow that they do it but somehow pretend to be inclusive schools.

Don’t want to be too political. But I find similar to Trump that proposed tax cuts saying that they will benefit their base. There is some disconnect between the announced policies and the actual objectives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do private colleges are now accountable and private schools not? Are they sacred cows?. What is the legal basis to treat two private entities differently? Is it ok to be race neutral in college admissions and not neutral in school admissions ?

Troll if you want but it will say a lot if you don’t provide a logical argument.

This might be news to you, but private entities that do not receive any govt funds, can discriminate all day long. Maybe they won’t do it because it’s not great PR but it certainly ain’t illegal.

Otherwise, all-boys and all-girls schools would also not be legal.

Anonymous wrote:Why do private colleges are now accountable and private schools not? Are they sacred cows?. What is the legal basis to treat two private entities differently? Is it ok to be race neutral in college admissions and not neutral in school admissions ?

Troll if you want but it will say a lot if you don’t provide a logical argument.

This might be news to you, but private entities that do not receive any govt funds, can discriminate all day long. Maybe they won’t do it because it’s not great PR but it certainly ain’t illegal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, How do you propose to police these qualitative and subjective assessments? When you apply, should the AO bluntly tell you they didn’t admit your kid because you seem like an overbearing jerk? Or that kid seems a bit whiney while playing with blocks? Or that the other kid in the room just seems more articulate than yours? Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?

TBH the process of admitting kids seems a bit like a beauty pageant in that it seems totally subjective. But I still like holistic admissions schools better than admissions “by the numbers” like in your vision.

Darling, I never said “by the numbers” but spell out clearly if a kid is admitted because the school likes the skin color.
Used to be legal in Harvard, not anymore. Still is legal in schools. Not sure for how long.

I looks like You’re one of the lobotomized parents in this thread.

How sad that you can't engage in civilized discourse without insulting others. Personally, if I were an AO, that is why I would reject your application.

Agree. It is not very clever to say : “Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?”

Come on, every parent thinks their kid is better in every way. If you get rejected and you have some sort of preconceived notion that the schools are being unfair, I'm not sure how the schools will defend themselves against this accusation.

My kid study in a private school and their classmates are very nice kids from nice families. But i know children from several families that are rejected and devastated because of that. They think that their kids are underperforming . But the reality is that their kids are not that different from the admitted kids.

I just get frustrated a bit with the system. There few reputable schools in dc an unlimited demand. There is always the case that the majority of children. Will be excluded. I just believe that for the excluded it would be better to have mire information than less on the criteria so they can know why their kids didn’t pass the bar .

Not suggest changing the admission process but disclose more information.

Ok, I see. Yeah it is really frustrating. I just posted above, also that these explanations aren't always possible. I have friends kids applying for college, and even post SFFA vs Harvard the process can be really hard to take.

Wanted to come back to say, I am not trying to diminish your experience just because we had a good one. But just wanted to point out that if you had a bad experience with one institution does not mean that all these places are bad and unfair. And in fact, perhaps if you have had a bad experience it is probably better to address it specifically and ask questions and perhaps they will give you the answers you want. The problem is, a lot of qualified kids get rejected all the time, when in reality there is no such thing as a "better" kid, and it often is for difficult and hurtful not to get in. However, the reason one kid gets in over another is not always easy to explain and so the "transparency" you speak of may not really be satisfying in the end. It can only be easy to explain if you admit strictly by the numbers like test scores or grades. With personality and good fit factors in play, it can really just come down to bad luck and not vibing with the interviewer sometimes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, How do you propose to police these qualitative and subjective assessments? When you apply, should the AO bluntly tell you they didn’t admit your kid because you seem like an overbearing jerk? Or that kid seems a bit whiney while playing with blocks? Or that the other kid in the room just seems more articulate than yours? Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?

TBH the process of admitting kids seems a bit like a beauty pageant in that it seems totally subjective. But I still like holistic admissions schools better than admissions “by the numbers” like in your vision.

Darling, I never said “by the numbers” but spell out clearly if a kid is admitted because the school likes the skin color.
Used to be legal in Harvard, not anymore. Still is legal in schools. Not sure for how long.

I looks like You’re one of the lobotomized parents in this thread.

How sad that you can't engage in civilized discourse without insulting others. Personally, if I were an AO, that is why I would reject your application.

Agree. It is not very clever to say : “Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?”

Come on, every parent thinks their kid is better in every way. If you get rejected and you have some sort of preconceived notion that the schools are being unfair, I'm not sure how the schools will defend themselves against this accusation.

My kid study in a private school and their classmates are very nice kids from nice families. But i know children from several families that are rejected and devastated because of that. They think that their kids are underperforming . But the reality is that their kids are not that different from the admitted kids.

I just get frustrated a bit with the system. There few reputable schools in dc an unlimited demand. There is always the case that the majority of children. Will be excluded. I just believe that for the excluded it would be better to have mire information than less on the criteria so they can know why their kids didn’t pass the bar .

Not suggest changing the admission process but disclose more information.

Okay, OP, instead of beating around the bush, I'm just going to be straight up honest. I'm pretty sure you are Asian American. I am Asian American too. I have never, once, during the entire process of private school admissions felt in any way discriminated against because of my family's skin color. I find your antagonism towards the private schools hard to understand, and so am wondering where it comes from. My kid has always felt completely welcome. The other Asian kids at her school and other private school families we know feel very comfortable as well, and that seems to be the case whether their families are 1st gen or much older get. Are you this angry because of some personal experience? If so, then I am sorry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, How do you propose to police these qualitative and subjective assessments? When you apply, should the AO bluntly tell you they didn’t admit your kid because you seem like an overbearing jerk? Or that kid seems a bit whiney while playing with blocks? Or that the other kid in the room just seems more articulate than yours? Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?

TBH the process of admitting kids seems a bit like a beauty pageant in that it seems totally subjective. But I still like holistic admissions schools better than admissions “by the numbers” like in your vision.

Darling, I never said “by the numbers” but spell out clearly if a kid is admitted because the school likes the skin color.
Used to be legal in Harvard, not anymore. Still is legal in schools. Not sure for how long.

I looks like You’re one of the lobotomized parents in this thread.

How sad that you can't engage in civilized discourse without insulting others. Personally, if I were an AO, that is why I would reject your application.

Agree. It is not very clever to say : “Then will you still cry racism anyway because you think your kid was smarter and better in every way?”

Come on, every parent thinks their kid is better in every way. If you get rejected and you have some sort of preconceived notion that the schools are being unfair, I'm not sure how the schools will defend themselves against this accusation.