<p>Agree with you Benley. I think the main reason that Exeter’s admit rate is higher than Andover’s is because they admit more full pay students, knowing they will yield at a lower rate than the full pay kids. In contrast, Andover’s need blind status is leading to a lower admit rate, and thus, if Andover’s logic is correct is, perhaps, discouraging the very students they want to encourage to apply. I suspect too, that geography plays a role as well, making Andover more attractive to Boston-area day students–not much that can be done about that.</p>
<p>As for the “in the rough” wording–“students less familiar with boarding school” might have been less loaded. I think most of the kids are, in one way or another, rough diamonds when they arrive at boarding school–it’s the essence of the early teen years.</p>
<p>This new admissions process is a perilous one as it would have prevented Einstein from applying to Andover based on the middle school counselor’s recommendation. Of course, Exeter would have recruited him. I wonder if Mark Zuckerberg who attended Exeter applied to Andover and didn’t get in or he chose Exeter over Andover?</p>
<p>I wonder how the proposed new system will work out. (I will add that I don’t have a stake in the decision, so it’s a matter of speculation only.)</p>
<p>As I understand it from the article, Andover would like schools in effect to nominate the 5 to 10 students most likely to “fit into their school environment.” It would be convenient for Andover if this were so. On the other hand, the schools may not see their job as acting as gatekeepers for Andover’s admissions department. They may feel that their responsibility lies with the students under their care–and their families.</p>
<p>At a minimum, I’d predict that any parent who feels their child should receive a “golden ticket” will be angry with their school, should the school not give his child the nod. Angry parents can kick up a fuss. I suspect the most ambitious and aggressive parents’ children will, over time, end up on the list. </p>
<p>Why should a school sow ill-will among their student body, and anger their own donors?</p>
<p>It seems like I remember reading at some point where Andover said that something like 75% to 80% of applicants were “academically admissible.” If they simply stated very clearly what makes one so, that would cut their applications down (theoretically) by 25 to 20 percent. It would save a good bit of time for the admissions staff, I would imagine, and it would allow for a bit more self-selection among applicants.</p>
<p>After reading the newspaper article, I really couldn’t understand how Andover’s new approaches would help achieve its purported goal, which I believe was to encourage applications from those who didn’t think they would fit at Andover but in fact they do. Many of them are likely to be outside Andover’s traditional applicant pool.</p>
<p>Pre-screening by middle school counselors and alumni primarily help reduce unqualified applications. While this could help AOs from reading frivolous applications, I am sure if it changes anything fundamentally. I think this is called outsourcing. Counselors and alumni would think they know what Andover wants, and try to recruit applicants fitting this profile/stereotype, making Andover less diversified and more homogeneous. Whether this is justified or not, I don’t see how this is different from what they have done in the past. </p>
<p>Why don’t they instead go out to visit more cities and schools they haven’t made visits in the past? I know they have Facebook but why not spend more efforts on those social networking sites where teens hang out?</p>
<p>It doesn’t sound like this has anything to do with where the bulk of potential students who would increase the “diversity” of the school population are: public middle schools where neither the students nor the guidance counselors know anything about boarding schools. I don’t know whether Andover or any schools really want to reach this population; if all the brightest kids in the country were made aware of what the top boarding schools offer and that substantial financial aid is a possibility, the number of applications might be closer to what colleges see. </p>
<p>And in places that have just slightly more awareness, such as the area where I live, Andover is often the only high-level prep school people have heard of (other than Lawrenceville, which is within day-student distance). Name recognition can’t help but lead to more applications.</p>
<p>By the way, middle schoolers are not necessarily going to be on Facebook and other social networking sites.</p>
<p>A new initiative Ivy+ colleges are taking to reach more low-income applicants. While Andover is not exactly trying to reach the same subgroup of applicants, I guess something similar to this initiative would be more effective in reaching out to more applicants who don’t know the “sophistication” of prep school application process.</p>
<p>Ever-shrinking admit rates have not discouraged applicants from applying to Harvard, so I doubt lower admit rates will dissuade students from applying to Andover. In fact, as long as the dream of admission to elite educational institutions trumps the reality of likely rejection, I suspect that the admission rate to Andover will continue to fall until it reaches a point where it can fall no further.</p>
<p>The admit rate won’t fall much further as there are only so many people with deep pockets that can pay full freight and willing to be loaned to BS to be raised by the dorm parents.</p>
I want to highlight the stance of this poster’s, and to say to those who have openly agreed with him/her for whatever reason and in effect encouraged him/her to continue to be ■■■■■■■■ in the prep school forum - shame on you.</p>
<p>Benley, That is a valid reason that will limit the number of applicants to BS as many parents who can afford BS decide not to send their children away. Case in point, I’m in BS, but my friend who is richer than me decided to stay at a local day school as per her parents’ wishes.</p>
<p>Can someone please list the names of these “feeder middle schools” that Andover and Exeter (and presumably others on or near their level) tend to draw from? I’ve never heard of feeder schools at the middle school level, but I guess it makes sense. Now I’m curious. Thanks.</p>
<p>Our local private day school (Upstate NY) is Pre-K through 12, so I doubt they have any BS fairs or secondary placement counseling geared toward placing kids in other schools, as they would then lose out on tuition dollars. I’ve heard of Cardigan Mountain, now that I think about it. What other private middle schools are big feeders? Personally, I cannot imagine sending a child to away to school that young, assuming that some of the feeder middle schools are boarding, but if that works for some people, more power to them.</p>
Then you must be bitterly full of buyer’s remorse and many of your statements sound ungrateful for mocking people like your parents who spend 200 grand for your HS education! </p>
<p>Benley, I don’t get the impression that pwalsh is mocking or ungrateful. It’s okay to question the value of an expensive high school, college, etc. even if you’re in the middle of it. It’s okay to have doubts that it’s worth the expense. You’re also making the assumption that pwalsh’s parents are rich. For all you know, pwalsh could be the child of someone working in the school cafeteria full-time and attending tuition-free because of it. I say this because I myself was a non-rich boarding school kid, and although boarding school saved me from a terrible public school situation, it was not always sunshine and roses, and I was always afraid to talk about those aspects because of being seen as “ungrateful.”</p>
<p>Maybe pwalsh’s school isn’t a good match for them. Maybe they’re not a boarding school kind of kid. Maybe they had a better experience at public school than private. Maybe Pwalsh really wanted to stay home with his/her parents, but the parents made an executive decision to send him/her away to school and Pwalsh is upset about that and feels shipped off (a very valid thing to feel upset about, in my opinion). Pwalsh is allowed to question boarding school and even have negative feelings about it. Requiring someone to act happy 24/7 just because their parents spent 200k on something for them (which again is a HUGE assumption) is unrealistic and unfair. </p>
<p>Even a kid who is dying to go to a particular boarding school might have a rough time there and question whether it is really worth the family/financial sacrifice or not. Let’s cut pwalsh a little slack here.</p>
<p>coconutcake, thanks for your input. Yes indeed, the poster “could be the child of someone working in the school cafeteria full-time and attending tuition-free because of it” althought he/she mentioned his/her friend “richer than” him/her “decided to stay at a local day school as per her parents’ wishes.” And, wouldn’t it be even more unkind to ruthelessly mock those who pay full tuition while you are receiving a free education? I see that as anothe kind of “ungrateful”. Would you agree?</p>
<p>
All the possible good reasons to not be happy 24/7. I suggest you check on his/her posting history though for the consistent anti- elite/private/boarding school theme his/her posts demonstrated and see if they qualify for an indication of “not happy 24/7”. </p>
<p>I personally think posters here have cut pwalsh too much slack.</p>
<p>Message is more important than who the messenger is. Questioning the high cost of BS is not bashing. I hope you are not being too sensitive or a huge cheerleader of BS or both.</p>
<p>Folks who are unhappy with the high cost of BS and the rich kids who attend them should not be considering applying to any of these schools. Think about it. BS is expensive. Rich kids are rich.</p>