<p>Yeah, I was thinking about exactly what you just suggested as well. </p>
<p>Andover historically has also only admitted 8 football PGs, but this year, we admitted 9. And unfortunately, all nine are coming. Unfortunate because if a school has more than 8 PGs, it is then ill eligible for the playoffs.</p>
<p>ksong12-
That’s not the case from my understanding. They may admit more than 8 but cannot play more than 8. It is similar in the Hotchkiss/Salisbury league in which they can admit more than 4 (sometimes they yield too many) but may only play 4. There have been some weird/sketchy situations in which a team plays a different group of PG’s at different games but that is very, very rare. So i don’t believe Andover is ineligible unless they decide to play all 9.</p>
<p>Toombs–I agree it’s cost-free to stay on the waiting list, especially if your son is not an incoming prep (as to that class, it certainly sounds like there’s an abundant waiting list with virtually no chance of movement except possibly in a couple of spots that may develop at the last minute–i.e., after July 1). One of my older sons is in a similar situation: he’s waitlisted at his top choice college and has put down a deposit on another school that he knows will be great. However, if he happens to get the call from his number one choice, he’d take it in a second. He’ll be fine either way, and keeping his name on the waiting list is cost-free. </p>
<p>It sounds like your son would do tremendously at either school. I’ll let you know if I hear anything else on the PEA grapevine.</p>
<p>Thanks much, Momalot. Looks we are taking similar rides, all with little or no downside. Please let me know how things turn out for your college-bound son. Also, please post on this thread anything you hear about movement on the Exeter WL.</p>
<p>Has anyone heard about WL movement at Peddie or Lawrenceville?</p>
<p>mhmm, if you think that it is really all up to the child to get into his chosen college, then why should anyone ever spend four years of a young life stuck in the cold bricks and stones of some prep school that is hidden off the back roads of small town NE and attended by a gang of strangers? Well, so many fine and tender 13 and 14 year kids from all around the world leave their mothers’ warm embraces and their dads steady hands because these schools in fact do help them get into highly selective colleges. And the best boarding schools are those that help the most kids get into the most selective universities, in my most humble opinion. </p>
<p>So, if you think that boarding schools will help you get into your chosen college, then it makes sense to me that you should try and get into the boarding school that has the highest rate of graduating kids who attend your chosen college. If not, stay home, work hard at your local high school and then go ahead and try to get into your chosen college.</p>
<p>Yes, you are right, but if you are going to admit somebody for football, you can’t really say no, we’re not going to let you play. </p>
<p>I don’t have any first hand information: This is based on an email that current varsity football players in my dorm recieved about this.</p>
<p>Well, the purpose of attending a top boarding school is debatable. Some people believe that it is the place to receive the best possible training in acadmics and character, and that college placement is a secondary consideration; others think going to the most selective college is at least as an important goal as everything else. </p>
<p>Regardless, I have been puzzled by the legacy or hook theory about any mention of the college placement records. It seems that people always brush off a good college matriculation record of a school by saying it’s because they have a large number of legacy students. When the theory is applied to the comparison of a boarding school with a public school or even a local day school, it does make some sense, but the same theory on comparison of Exeter and Hotchkiss? Is Hotchkiss any less elite than Exeter? Does Hotchkiss attract fewer legacy students? Has Hotchkiss expanded the diversity of its student body as extensively as Exeter? Why does Hotchkiss have a fewer percentage of students with hooks than Exeter does? Then - Is there such a thing as a school does indeed do significantly better than another school in placing its students into the most selective colleges? Is one name more “recognizable” than another in college admission community?</p>
<p>Schools produce impressive matriculation statistics only to the extent that they have impressive students. The prep schools with the best statistics have those statistics because, year after year, they somehow attract the best students, or rather, more of those students with the very qualities that elite colleges seek. It is the student, and not the school, that gains admission to college. Parents and applicants are misled by matriculation statistics. Watertester, it is splendid and commendable that your son is going to Andover. But your son will be admitted to an elite college wherever he goes to secondary school, precisely because he is talented and motivated. It is the student, not the school that matters. Let’s not kid ourselves.</p>
<p>Pan1956, I’d love to think that a kid that is talented and motivated will be able to get into his chosen college no matter which high school he attends (it would be a relief!). My question was about the legacy/hook factor in elite BS’s college matriculation game. And by the way I bet not everyone believes that students in one school are generally better than students in another. How many people say students in Exeter are generally more talented and motivted than students in Hotchkiss?</p>
<p>I don’t think “better” is the most appropriate adjective. Rather, some schools have the means and resources and reputations to attract truckolads of students who have the characteristics that elite college admission offices seek. And it becomes a self-sustaining cycle: the schools attract those students, generate the matriculation data that is so impressive, and consequently generate more interest in themselves, leading to more applications and a more diverse pool from which to choose. But the bulk of those students who are responsible for the matriculation statistics that everyone ogles at would have done just as well at public school, at least with respect to matriculation.</p>
<p>In the market where colleges shop for students, brands are important. A college that has tried, tested and selected students from one BS for years will regularly stock up on such kids each year to the extent possible until they prove less worthy. Cold, maybe cruel, but I think true. (Note: Such buying habits were even more pronounced 30+ years ago when I was attending a certain Ivy League school. My class there had over 35 kids from one certain BS alone. Based upon this choice nugget I panned out of my freshman register, I told my parents to send my brother to that school if they wanted him to attend my college. They did, and he did.)</p>
<p>As bland and boring consumers, we buy brand names over the unknown products more often than not. Colleges are no different, I maintain, when it comes to selecting kids for admission when there close calls among kids with similar scores, grades, sports, EC, etc. The school name…the brand name…matters. Again, if not, why are so many folks spending so much money these days, especially when there is less and less of it, to get that big fat Andover, Exeter, etc. brand seared deep into their child’s hindquarters?</p>
<p>Watertester, all of the evidence is anecdotal as schools don’t tell us how many legacies, athletes and URMs matriculate at each college. For our family, it wasn’t until our kids were seniors at their respective high schools that we really got a birds eye view. It’s when the kids really start to talk and understand the competitive factors.</p>
<p>When your child is a senior he’ll break it down for you–for example, of the 6 who got into Princeton last year from DS’s high school 3 were legacies, 2 URMs and 1 athlete. All 6 had hooks…and so it goes.</p>
<p>Toombs, the colleges that you allude to have dramatically expanded the base of secondary schools from which they derive their classes. Yes, there was a time when the Andover headmaster had a direct line to the admissions office at Yale and directed whichever students he wanted through the New Haven pipeline. That was an age of connections, old boy networks, legacy and plutocracy/aristocracy. It is also an age that is over. The elite colleges strive for a diverse student body representing a multitude of backgrounds and experiences. It is almost as if they have reversed the rules: whereas it used to be to your advantage if your parents were well educated, being the first in your family to go to college now represents a formidable advantage. The mere fact of attending an elite boarding school does not represent an advantage; we only think that it does.</p>
<p>As to why so many folks are spending so much money to get the brand “seared deep in their child’s hindquarters,” well, either the parents do not realize that it is the student and not the school that results in the matriculation, or they choose these schools for reasons above and beyond the question of matriculation. Perhaps for the quality of the education, or the total experience, or the connections or the prestige. But not everyone spends the money just for matriculation. Those that understand, realize that you don’t even have to spend the money if matriculation is what you are after.</p>
<p>The problem is that some of us are greedier - we want the total experience, the connection and prestige, plus a helping hand in getting into a great college. :)</p>
<p>Well, at least you presume that you are getting a helping hand. If your admittedly talented and motivated kid goes to a local high school he is competing against two others from his school to get into the college of his dreams. If he goes to an elite prep school, he is competing against fifty, all at least as talented as he is. So under which circumstances does he stand out in better relief against the background noise?</p>
<p>pan1856, the advantages gained at colleges by attending the “right” BS are not what they used to be. But the advantages still remain, as all can see when about 1/3 of all grads of SPS still enroll in an Ivy League school, MIT or Stanford. A quality brand still sizzles and sells.</p>
<p>1/3 of SPS grads go Ivy or MIT or Stanford because SPS is very good at recruiting and enrolling very qualified students. These students, had they gone elsewhere, would have enrolled Ivy or MIT or Stanford. I give the students, rather than the school, the credit.</p>
<p>I give SPS and their students both credit. That said, you really don’t know, and you never will know, whether or not these schools would have accepted all of these kids if they had not attended SPS. We do know, however, that all of them graduated from SPS and all of them attend these great colleges schools. So there is a connection between these kids, these colleges and SPS. I tend to think that this link is strong, valuable and, in some cases, critical. Others may differ on the value of the link, but the link is undeniable.</p>
<p>I agree with Pan. It is very easy to confuse correlation and causation.</p>