Many selective colleges have regional reps whose job it is to get to know the high schools in our area. They attend our college night, and all day college fair, conduct info sessions at the high school and talk to the counselors. They may even sit in on classes or watch a performance or two. They can’t do it for every single school, but they really do make an effort. I’ve heard their comments about our school, and they know what we offer. Our average SAT scores don’t look that good, but they both from the profile and from walking around that the top students are getting a good education with pretty nice extras thrown in. They also probably know that the kids who attend their colleges aren’t flunking out.
The bottom line still is that the high school you go to is much less important than the person and student that you are.
@iwannabe_Brown Don’t know if it’s the case for Latin, but in NYC, you can hire consultants to train your kids to do better on the tests needed to place in to the kindergartens of the top private schools
That used to be the case but several years ago NYC private schools ended the practice of standardized testing for K admissions
Going to a good high school, with peers with interests in academics and good ECs, having good teachers, having lots of AP offerings … the odds of an average motivation student to move on to a good college and a good rewarding life are high.
Going to a mediocre high school … average motivation student … maybe OK outcome. But if the top 10 people are going to flagships with only 1 Ivy per year … will it be your child …
Going to a poor high school … outcome is not promising … there are lots of distractions and temptations and limited support from peers and the school to even come close to preparing for an elite or even flagship or even top 200 school.
Going to an excellent high school, like a top private, that will academically prepare your child, that will make them sort of elite in mannerisms, that will build a portfolio of college admissions achievements … outcome is likely very, very good.
So if your special snowflake is a self-starter who will get that 4.0 and won’t go off drinking or drugging with the other folks, maybe you can game the system and get your child up one rung of the college ladder (and maybe they can catch up with their better prepared peers there too).
But the large number of people willing to pay private school tuitions and/or move to school districts with stellar reputations are not stupid …
And if your child is taking 10 APs and getting good scores because it is the norm in your school, this will look distinctive to all but the top 20 schools, even with a 3.5 GPA. And, your child will have taken college level art history or economics or English or history … most people never have time for this in college due to major requirements … and it is a great thing to know more about. Similarly, a future English major having taken AP calc or science … that is a good thing too.
Doesn’t seem to have stopped the consultants:
http://abacusmom.com/nyc-private-school-2015-admissions-consulting-kindergarten-2014-08-16/
So basically if you are confident that your child is a self-starter and can ignore all the negative distractions at a large public school, then just send them there and they will most likely get into a good school because it will be easy to get good grades…plus it’s free. Here in Los Angeles, we have one of the worst public school systems in the country so you’ll definitely be taking a risk.
I don’t know about getting accepted, but from my own experience, I’d advise kids from a school with poor academics to make good use of any tutoring centers and similar services at their college. I went to a religious HS with poor academics and was never challenged in math. I suppose that happens to lots of kids even in reasonably good schools. When kids get to college and are challenged in math, science, or whatever for the first time, they need to know how to ask for help, rather than “hitting the wall” and giving up.
LAUSD is a tough one. Hopefully, they are at least putting kids in actual classes this year, not just a bunch of study halls and classes they’d already passed as was the subject of the Cruz v. State of California lawsuit last year and addressed in AB 1012. Just horrible reading about what that district was doing to kids, especially with the disparity between say Jefferson HS and the amount of money spent just on the campus of Cortines School of Visual and Performing Arts. Personally, I think it’s well past time to split that district up into districts of manageable sizes.
Pretty much, but I would also add that there is value to the better teaching/learning opportunities the more rigorous schools have. There’s no question that (on average) the better schools produce better students who will be more successful in college admissions and in college. I was only contending with the idea that the student bodies have demonstrably different intelligence levels, rather than just different academic preparation/skills.
A hs can be lesser in general, but have some strong depts. Within those, there can be great teachers who hold to high standards and inspire. Or there can be programs for the more able kids. There is broad variation among under performing hs and within them. Same holds for many magnets (even the attention getting magnets can have a large percentage of kids not headed off to a 2 yr or 4 yr experience.) Then, you can have some sweet suburban high schools that seem fine, but essentially throw accolades at whatever a kid puts out.
So knowing my child, I really think he will need the extra push and strictness that a private school provides. I can’t imagine him striving at a public school.
I recall reading a few years back about the trend of moving B+/top 25% students from top-ranked high schools to low-ranked high schools for junior/senior year, for the purpose of changing B+/top 25% students into A/top 10% students. Maybe snaring the coveted Val/Sal spot. It that no longer a “thing?”