<p>I post these stats from our local high school every year. People seem to find them of some interest.</p>
<p>I'm assuming it's okay since they're on a public website - no password or anything necessary. I can't be the only parent ever to read this site, and it doesn't seem like anyone has complained yet.</p>
<p>I think it's self reported, so take it for what it's worth.</p>
<p>Palos Verde right? I do not think that it is an accurate sample for the greater Los Angeles area. You know clearly well that it is above most LA high schools in standards.</p>
<p>^^^
Interesting. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly where in my post did I imply it was?</p>
<p>I merely said “Los Angeles” to give people a general idea of its geographical location. I should have said “Los Angeles area.” Although they probably would have had some idea it was in California from all the UCs and CSUs on the list. Calmer now?</p>
<p>I was merely saying Palos Verde is a wealthy neighborhood and that it would not reflect, let’s say, Los Angeles High. I mean I am quite surprised at that chart. My school is in a neighborhood just a notch down in the socioeconomic ladder than PV, 6 people got into Cornell last year(actually matricated, probably more accepted). PV had none; quite fascinating.</p>
<p>Interesting, Northwestern must not like this HS. Out of 24 applicants, only 2 were admitted, 4 were waitlisted, and the rest (18) were denied. 8.3% acceptance rate. The average admitted stats: 2330 SAT, 4.9375. 1 matriculated.</p>
<p>Then it obviously isn’t above the standards of your school, so maybe it is more representative than you think.</p>
<p>Well, the second line of the sheet is in error. Freshmen do not get admitted to the UC Berkeley Haas School of Business. Intended undergraduate business majors must apply to the undergraduate business major after completing the prerequisites, typically in their second year.</p>
<p>It doesn’t appear to be that easy to get into Stanford from this school. I wondered about #112’s rejection in particular.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OR…the applicants from this HS just weren’t that strong in the larger pool? IMHO that is usually what’s going on.</p>
<p>Think of it this way: a HS could have 100 applicants to school X, but school X (let’s pretend it has a 20% admit rate on average) could deny all of them. Doesn’t mean necessarily that school X “doesn’t like” that HS, it could mean that all 100 of those applicants were weak for the pool.</p>
<p>Or, a HS could have 100 applicants to school X and school X could admit 70% of them. Doesn’t necessarily mean that school X “likes” that HS - it could (and usually) mean that the specific applicants were strong that year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ehhh - #112 also got waitlisted at CalTech and Harvey Mudd. Probably a sci/engr. kid based upon assumptions on his/her schools list. Deny from Stanford doesn’t surprise me in this context - Stanford is swimming in high-scoring math/sci/engr. applicants from CA, particularly Southern California.</p>
<p>very interesting thanks for posting…</p>
<h1>324 is crazy…who applies to 22 schools! seems like an “acceptance letter” hoarder and prestige whore…</h1>
<p>One oddity is student 346 – s/he applied only to CSU Dominguez Hills, a non-impacted CSU that takes all CSU-eligible applicants (which s/he should have been with a GPA > 3.0) and got rejected. Apparently, s/he (as student 477) later went to LA Harbor (community college).</p>
<p>Things and/or applicants I find interesting just from a page or two of this:</p>
<h1>185 – someone should’ve told him/her to get some safety schools on that list! Only had one admit (Brandeis - where s/he enrolled). WL’ed at 6 schools, denied at 4. Didn’t seem to be any safeties on the list, even with his/her stats (all the schools were fairly selective at least).</h1>
<h1>187 – would’ve thought this applicant would have been more competitive, based upon GPA and standardized testing/AP courseload (3.7 uw, 4.4 w, 710/670/700, 33 ACT, 6 APs), for Skidmore, Kenyon, and Muhlenberg. Of course we don’t know anything about him/her (I’d guess based upon the Skidmore WL that it’s a her) - she could’ve had less-than-amazing recs or be a high-need student at schools that aren’t need-blind. But this was an interesting reality check for folks who assume that these small LACs are as easy to get into as they used to be.</h1>
<h1>201 - in at UC Davis and UC Irvine, but rejected from Biola?</h1>
<h1>249 - must have had some specific interests (major? program? family?) that drove this college list b/c it’s fascinating. SUNY Oswego, Univ. of Maine, Colorado State, Juniata, Ohio Wesleyan, Univ. of Montana? I’m guessing it’s veterinary science or environmental stuff.</h1>
<h1>255 - applied to 20+ schools!</h1>
<p>Also surprised by the number of applicants from this school to BC and BU. Boston appears to be popular for these kids out in sunny Southern CA!</p>
<p>My DH and I played around with the PVPHS data earlier this fall. Our first step was to turn it into a Google Docs spreadsheet to facilitate analysis. We’ve done the same with the PVPHS data from the classes of 2010 and 2009, too. If anyone wants them, here are links to our spreadsheets:</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“PVPHS_2011 - Google Sheets”>PVPHS_2011 - Google Sheets]PVPHS_2011[/url</a>]</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“PVPHS_2010 - Google Sheets”>PVPHS_2010 - Google Sheets]PVPHS_2010[/url</a>]</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“PVPHS_2009 - Google Sheets”>PVPHS_2009 - Google Sheets]PVPHA_2009[/url</a>]</p>
<p>UCLA seems to be more selective than USC, but USC appears to have a better yield among the accepted students from this high school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How about #250: applied to 9 schools: CMU, Swarthmore, Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Penn, Stanford, Yale, Dartmouth. Nothing that anyone would remotely consider a safety. Did get into CMU and Swarthmore (attending).</p>
<h1>264 got shut out. S/he applied to a bunch of CSUs, including unimpacted ones, and got denied at all, despite apparently being CSU eligible by GPA and SAT score.</h1>
<p>This is really interesting and helpful perspective to see the numbers and variety of applications for each kid. The admission and rejection patterns, and the lack of pattern in some cases based on raw numbers alone. Thanks for posting this.</p>
<h1>38, in at UCB, UCLA but waitlisted at Davis? Is this West coast Tufts syndrome?</h1>
<p>I’m glad D loved the UOregon campus, looks like a safety. </p>
<p>PS LOVE data, thank you for posting. I seem to recall poring over last year’s spreadsheet.</p>
<p>Many CSUs are getting selective these days. I was shocked by some of my friend’s kids results at Long Beach.</p>
<p>Yes, but the oddities were denials at unimpacted CSUs like Dominguez Hills and East Bay. Which may indicate that the applicant was not CSU eligible at all due to missing course requirements or something like that, but then s/he and the counselor should have been able to figure that out before bothering to apply.</p>