<p>A family friend of mine lives in a rural area and goes to a public high school that is mediocre at best. It doesn't have a great reputation-- deservedly so. The coursework is easy for him, and he's getting all A's. Will his school effect his chances of getting into a good college? If so, how? In other words, will an A from a lousy school look the same as an A from a great one?</p>
<p>You can get into any college from any high school. They’re evaluating the student, not the school. For instance, if your school offers no AP classes, you won’t be penalized for not taking AP classes. Students from rural areas can actually see a slight boost at certain colleges because colleges are looking for geographic diversity.</p>
<p>I graduated in a high school class of just over 40 people and went to a top 20 LAC. It’s definitely possible.</p>
<p>UT Austin found out that higher gpa from a lower “quality” school and a lower SAT was a better indicator of success in college than someone with a higher SAT from a better “quality” school but lower gpa. I think colleges in general recognize this as someone who made the most of the opportunities presented to her.</p>
<p>Thanks for your replies. :)</p>
<p>@sadilly: How does that make any sense? A kid who gets a 4.0 and a 1800 in a school that gives out As for attendance definitely won’t do better in college than a kid who gets a 3.0 and a 2300 in Exeter.</p>
<p>Clearly, it does. Why else does Andover get 30 kids a year into Harvard and most high schools – who give out as least as many "A"s as Andover – have yet to sniff a whiff of the Ivies?</p>
<p>placido: because Andover students don’t match the demographics of the avg american HS.</p>
<p>^^That’s not completely true. Andover and Exeter are filled with Ivy legacies, athletic recruits, and other hooks.</p>
<p>I would say yes, and perhaps it is actually a negative in some cases.</p>
<p>I say this because many kids at some of the top private New England high schools who are only in the top 1/3 of their class would probably be valecdictorians at some of the public high schools in this country.</p>
<p>And even so, being at a top high school may even hurt your chances. At a top private where 30% of kids get into Ivy leagues, maybe 50-60% would have gone to Ivy league in a regular public HS. </p>
<p>With that being said, you have less leeway at a regular public. You need to be taking most of the AP’s offered and be at the top of your class, because it’s a less rigorous school overall.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That may be true in theory; but in reality, kids who attend schools with limited opportunities are not going to be as well prepared as those from schools with more robust programs; and while they may not be “penalized” for it, their lack of preparation is going to hurt them in standardized test scores. They’re also less likely to have had the enrichment opportunities that bigger and wealthier schools offer, they typically have only minimal college counseling services - it’s definitely not a level playing field.</p>
<p>I follow closely two local schools - one in my home community and the other in a community eight miles away. They typically graduate classes averaging 35 and 25 kids a year. Neither has AP classes or honore classes. Neither offers any academic electives. Math classes in both top out at pre-calculus. In 14 years, not a single kid has gone to one of the colleges that the CC crowd would consider a “top school.” A few (maybe 6 or 8) have gone to Big 10 schools (UIUC and Purdue), but that’s the top of the heap. Last year, our valedictorian went to Augustana (Illinois). The year before, we had co-vals; one went to a CC and the other was slated for Western Illinois but died in an accident beforehand. The other school, one year’s val went to Aurora University (ever heard of it?), the next year’s to a CC.</p>
<p>Let’s not kid ourselves. I went to a lowly public high school and did just fine, but there actually IS a huge difference when comparing high schools. Andover, for example, had around 25 students accepted to Stanford early in the class of 2011. Perhaps it’s true that they tend to produce kids who are better prepared, but admissions counselors do take note of schools like Horace Mann, Trinity, and Exeter when making decisions–they know these schools very well.</p>
<p>I can’t find the report on the UT website. It was hard to find to begin with. This is the quickest reference I could find [Enhancing</a> Equity and Excellence at Public Universities | FairTest](<a href=“http://fairtest.org/enhancing-equity-and-excellence-public-universities]Enhancing”>http://fairtest.org/enhancing-equity-and-excellence-public-universities). You also need to keep in mind the context. This is about the students in Texas at public schools. You have kids at the “best” public schools who don’t have a great class rank because of competition but can still afford to get their SAT scores up. They aren’t planning on going to Harvard. You have kids at poorer, inner city or rural schools, that don’t do test prep but work their butts off to be in the top 10% of their class. Yes, it may be easier for someone from the Dallas suburbs to blow away the classes at Edgewood but it doesn’t reflect the work ethic involved. At least, that was one of the speculated reasons for the difference. It’s not speculation in terms of results. People with lower SAT scores and higher gpa we’re doing better than those with higher SAT and lower grades. This was driving me nuts as a UT alumna, they kept asking for my support to get the law changed even though it did result in more minorities attending and graduating from UT and increased the number of high schools represented at UT from somewhere less than 200 to over 500. The law had support not just because minorities were getting in but people from schools in west and east Texas were attending as well. And no, I’m not a minority and the rule pretty much meant that my son wasn’t going to get into UT even though he had the SAT scores.</p>
<p>I would advise your friend to look into summer college classes and that combined with a stellar SAT will give him a huge boost from a school that doesn’t offer anything. Also many students self study AP and take the AP exams. That is another option. Another thing to really keep up with the ECs, even if not offered, he/she should be doing something out of the school. There are always opportunities for community service impact.</p>
<p>Just because a student attends a rural public high school doesn’t mean they are receiving
As for attendance. My children attend one of these so-called “mediocre” schools and are getting a great education. On paper, the school looks “mediocre” because many students are disadvantaged and are at risk for dropping out (30% drop out rate). However, we also have a small core of dedicated, bright, hard-working students (some of whom are also disadvantaged!) who take the few AP courses offered (and they do quite well on the AP exams). Every year, we have one or two students who apply and are accepted to the most “prestigious” schools in the country (Stanford, Chicago, MIT, Davidson, UVA and on and on). The overwhelming majority of kids in our high school who are college-bound attend the local University or a CC. Since these kids aren’t competing for spots with their classmates, they have an advantage (in my opinion) in the admissions process. I believe that coming from a rural, southern region helps as well. </p>
<p>I don’t doubt that kids who go to elite prep schools are getting a high quality “education” - as well as access to tremendous college application resources. But the kids here who lack all of those resources are living in a reality that is, for the most part, unprivileged and more “real”. I think that makes an impression on the powers that be.</p>
<p>My daughter is a Junior now, and we have looked at competitive schools. The recurring message we have received is that the admissions officers are looking for kids who “bloom where they are planted” (heard that quote several times). What that says to me is that they want hard-working, smart kids who avail themselves of whatever opportunities that are present. They don’t penalize kids for lacking opportunity.</p>
<p>Admissions officers know that for the vast majority of students, where they go to high school - whether it’s good or bad - is a function of the parents they were born to, not any achievement on the student’s part. They evaluate within the context.</p>