<p>My son is a 9th grader at a small private school and will be looking to go to 10th grade next year at one of these schools. His lower school grades have been high 80's and he is a good athlete.</p>
<p>I know a little about Salisbury. They do add a good number of 10th graders - in 2006 they had 45 9th graders and 75 10th graders. They are all boys (the other schools on your list are co-ed). </p>
<p>If you are considering the all boys schools, another one in that area that we have been very impressed with so far in the process is Trinity Pawling. </p>
<p>Millbrook has a zoo. THat's about all I know. Their view book was very "my-space" like - real busy with wayyyy too much info on each page, so I didn't read much of it. They do not have football. </p>
<p>I'm sure others here have more info about these schools than I do. We'll be visiting Salisbury in November.</p>
<p>If he is a good athlete, contact the coaches of the sports in which he excells. Your son might be able to see them when he is at the school for his tour & interview. At all schools, and especially at a very competitive school like Taft, it is important to let them know how he will contribute to community life.</p>
<p>If he is a very good athlete, the school will more than likely ask him to repeat 9th grade.</p>
<p>My son did a PG at Salisbury. I think he had a great experience. Excellent headmaster. Good coaches. Impressed with (most) of the faculty. In most respects, school was very responsive to our concerns. Don't try to call anyone during evening study hall however!</p>
<p>Interesting comment, keylyme, but would a school ask someone to repeat 9th grade even it there are no academic issues, just to have a student stay on a sports team for 4 years?</p>
<p>Yes. I don't know if is even specifically because of the athletic component, but I do know it is very common (I think numbers in an article posted were approximately one third) to repeat the ninth grade year (i.e. come in as a freshman when you've already completed that year at your public or other school).</p>
<p>yes, my son who is in tenth is way younger than many ninth graders at his school. he came in as a tenth grader, and one of the only boys from his old school not to repeat. no one suggested to us that he repeat.</p>
<p>so is this common practice at the schools mentioned? (Kent, Taft, Millbrook, Salisbury)? Seems as though there are two big downsides ...1: financial (this is an expensive proposition!) and 2: how do colleges view two ninth grade years??</p>
<p>I don't have specific information on those schools. Maybe someone remembers where the article is that discussed this practice? It outlined how common this is in boarding schools as a whole, so I would assume it is just as common at those schools.
Yes, it can be expensive, but no more expensive than going in as a true freshman and doing 4 years.
I really don't think it is detrmental to admissions. My older son knew several in his class who were repeat ninth-graders, and they all went to very good colleges. It is also not uncommon to reclassify as a junior again during your junior year instead of going directly to your senior year.
In the end, it is really no different than doing a PG year.</p>
<p>In many respects the colleges LIKE it. </p>
<p>College admissions is not really a game of who can amass the most positive creds with the minimum number of negative creds (such as "OMG he <em>repeated</em>") ... it's more about which candidates are most likely to succeed. </p>
<p>That extra year of preparation for college level work, especially when coupled with the boarding/away from home experience was, in our experience, viewed very positively.</p>
<p>One friend of ours did a 5th year because he was an athlete (hockey) as a PG. Both the prep school AND the colleges requested it. He is now at Yale on a hockey scholarship.</p>
<p>It is also sometimes about maturity - not just academics or athletics. Maturity being both physical and social.</p>
<p>There is a new NCAA rules making it harder for athletes to qualify if they use a year as a PG to improve their grades. Students must complete 16 core classes in four years from entering the 9th grade and may take 1 additional core class to meet the minimum requirements to play in college. I don't know how it applies to students that are academically qualified but are using a PG year to mature physically. I went to a parents informational meeting held by South Kent School last night and it was very interesting.</p>
<p>That rule isn't new...they have just increased the number of core classes you need. It was 14 and they have been increasing it...I think it goes up to 17 core classes (credits) by next year maybe. The classes are the basic classes that most college-bound students would take anway....4 credits of English, 3 math, 2 of a language, etc. There is no minimum grade required, just passing, and the NCAA will weight the grades if that is what your school does. I don't think many PG's would need their year to fulfill any of these requirements as they are really quite basic. My daughter had completed all requirements by the end of her Junior year in hs and she didn't even go to school full time.</p>
<p>Here is a link describing the timing requirements for the 16 core courses:</p>
<p>No, they haven't made it 17 yet. But here is the latest on the 16 core required classes:</p>
<p>For most prep school students, the 16 courses are typically required for graduation anyway. </p>
<p>As things are scheduled for goaliegirl, she should have 15 done (the exception being the 4th year of English) by the end of her Junior year.</p>
<p>Most public hs students planning on college should also have no problem completing them all. They are really just the "usual suspects". The NCAA has ridiculously low standards for "clearing" and athlete for eligibility. Of course, the college will decide on how low a grade/SAT score they will accept. They (the NCAA) use a sliding scale; the higher your GPA, the lower your SAT score can be and vice versa. A "B" student only needs like a 1000 SAT - the old format - (correct me if I am wrong, goaliedad, I am too lazy to get out my NCAA Clearinghouse booklet).</p>
<p>I've got you covered keylyme...</p>
<p>See page 9 (10th page of document including cover)</p>
<p>With a 1000 SAT (old format) you only need a 2.025 GPA in core courses. A very low hurdle to clear, indeed.</p>
<p>A 3.0 student needs only a 620 to clear. That is a combined score, folks. Most of the regulars around here will clear that on at least 1 and many on each section of the old format SAT.</p>
<p>And make no mistake....some of the "big" sports schools have no problem with those kinds of scores. My daughter was recruited by one of the major universities for a rather minor sport (definitely not a money-maker). She is a very good student and did well on her SAT's. She was told in advance, though, that she need only meet the minimum NCAA requirements and she would be advised of her acceptance as a student as soon as she got her application in. (The athlete apps are "coded"). She knew she was accepted in October. (This was not the school she chose). I don't really think this is a good thing...</p>