<p>It’s complicated. Top private school counselors do develop relationships in admissions offices. Many of them came out of top college admissions offices. In the process they certainly advocate for students. They do so in a genuine way on the whole because of the relationships. So by the time a kid is on a WL, they’ve probably been thoroughly advocated for and the committee has good insight into the student. Most of the counselors handle 25-35 students, they have time to discuss each one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While private high schools are smaller than a lot of publics, the range of students is also much, much smaller. Even an affluent suburb full of the highly educated (I worked in one of these schools too) has a pretty broad range of kids in their high schools. Just about every kids at a top private HS would be in the top 5% in the high schools in their home towns.</p>
<p>I have a friend who graduated a few kids from Harvard-Westlake… One made it to tie Ivies, one to a very good engineering school east, and one stayed west. The father is a prof at UCLA, not a Hollywood type. </p>
<p>$25k a year for high school regardless of who’s teaching or what the results are, however, is more telling about the system than where these graduates ended up. Our high school (top 1-2 in our state) has a graduating class of 1000 to 1100 and sends maybe 10 kids a year to the Ivies + top 20 + the like… Yet the two or three prep schools send a lot more students, often those who were classmates of our kids thru K-8, to the Ivies/20s. For the measly sum of $15k a year, a bargain for our state, one gets to rub elbows with the kids of politicians, pro sports magnates, and the like…</p>
<p>The perpetual student and lover of learning in me appreciates the outcome, however, I can’t help but wonder if the outcome is simply the 1% procreating (intellectually of course :-))</p>
<p>I think everyone should have a look at what these schools can offer. The best among them will take a kid wherever they want to go. Highly engaged teaches and students plus amazing resources makes for a really dynamic learning environment.</p>
<p>I always say these kids have already been to a top LAC.</p>
<p>^^^
Possible I suppose, but more likely explanations -
Data entry error.
The only UCs he/she applied to were UCLA, UCSD, and Irvine. I would have thought for certain they would have gotten into Irvine, but it might have been close depending on the UC GPA, which is different than both the weighted and unweighted GPA shown here. UCLA and UCSD were both extremely selective last year.</p>
<p>Gpa is much more important to UC than test scores. The rejections at SD and UCLA were pretty much a foregone conclusion; SD is based on points, and gpa counts for most of those points. Such students might have gotten into UCLA in the past with a great essay, but UC is now rejecting them in favor of rich OOS students. Irvine would have been a high match. Also note, only two marks in the EC columns.</p>
<p>Compare the stats of student #90 to #91: Identical. #90 was admitted to and attending Berkeley. Since Cal is not a consolation prize, it seems likely that other applications were recorded as denied when in fact they may have simply been withdrawn due to an early acceptance to Berkeley (recruited athlete). Those of us whose kids have apps in to UC can exhale now…</p>
<p>@momsquad- I wouldn’t necessarily make those assumptions. UCB, UCLA, and UCSD were extremely difficult to get in last year for many excellent students (look at the school specific threads around mid march and see the devastation). Hopefully those with kids applying to the UC’s were aware of the increased selectivity and applied more broadly than in the past. Several of D’s friends who thought they were a lock for UCLA and UCSD were outright rejected last year.</p>
<p>momsquad, I think 90 and 91 is the same student because it’s impossible to have identical stats down to the decimals. This person got into Berkeley, however, I don’t know why this student was rejected from UCI.</p>
<p>^^^ Yes, that was the point I was trying to make #90 and #91 are the same person. I doubt they were rejected from all the other campuses. I think they were admitted to Berkeley early and other applications were withdrawn then entered as a separate file.</p>
<p>^Your explanation makes sense about withdrawing after UCBerkely acceptance. I think the spreadsheet should indicate as such otherwise it’s very confusing to read the stats.</p>
<p>@camom,
Fortunately for us DD didn’t like UCSD, didn’t like the “vibe” at Berkeley (due to horror stories of friend’s children who lived in deplorable conditions & developed drug problems while there) but fell in love with Davis, UCSB and UCSC. Plus a reasonable list of private LACs and the University of Oregon (which I also loved). Still, would be nice to get at least one acceptance to the four UC’s she applied to. We haven’t visited UCI, but hey-it’s near Fashion Island!</p>
<p>Just a note on an unweighted 3.5–I think it might matter what the specific grades are that generated that GPA–four example, a couple of Cs in academic subjects might be worse than twice as many Bs in other subjects.</p>
<p>I quickly looked up the stats of the students that were admited to HYPSMDC. Most students have great grades and high SAT scores(2300+) without looking at their ECs. A few exception that were accepted to Yale and Stanford.</p>