<p>Neato:</p>
<p>I know, all this analysis still means our kiddo’s didn’t make whatever cut there was. :(</p>
<p>I’m serious. I’m done with this thread. Statistics don’t ever apply to the individual, only to the group. Thinking about all of this is simply not fruitful. What will be, will be. I think it’ll only be worse next year and I’m not sure I can set her up for so many “honorable mentions” again.</p>
<p>neato and flowers123,</p>
<p>Yes, all these high-road talk do not emphasize enough that kids from NE area are somewhat disadvantaged. </p>
<p>The kids from other areas do face more challenges once they are in, but their chances of getting in are much better. But if incidentally your child’s special talent/EC overlaps with that of a kid who can provide additional diversity (geographical or otherwise), it could mean WL.</p>
<p>In terms of whether there is a quota in admissions, someone had pointed out a while back that the percentages of various ethnicity and background at certain BS do not change much each year, even though people of certain background (Chinese and Korean, for example) are increasing. My guess is that there are probably no hard numbers, but the schools tend to keep a relatively stable percentage of people of various backgrounds.</p>
<p>At this point, I’d say the bar is definitely higher if you come from the traditional N.E. drawing area (NY, CT, MA in particular) or if you’re from Korea or China. In any of these instances, the schools’ desire to be geographically diverse is working to your detriment.</p>
<p>April 10+ a few days may lessen the blows. There’s a lot of good karma on the board for those who are still waiting and many prayers going out on your behalf for what it’s worth.</p>
<p>Hang tough, folks - April 10 has got to pop a bunch of spots loose - </p>
<p>In the meantime, and regardless of what happens, your kids are awesome, and I will bet that they know in their bones that their parents care immensely about their education. </p>
<p>In other words, the kids on the wait list are going to add a lot to the school lucky enough to get them. </p>
<p>We can all help by living the idea that education is a long game - a lot of worry at the beginning isn’t pleasant, but once you get them settled in, the worry fades. Worry includes the worries about “why that kid and not this kid”, the worries about the school’s reputation, the worries that someone is going to look down their nose at our kids who are doing nothing bad, just working hard for their future (umm…could we stop trashing other people’s schools, please? no matter how much it may build your kid up, it can’t help the overall effort by pulling another kid down) As someone pointed out a couple of days ago, the magic of boarding school lies in the fact that it is boarding school. The precise location doesn’t matter as much as the fact that they’re there - they’ve agreed to take the risk, and the reward will come.</p>
<p>Here’s an interesting article my husband saw recently. Assuming SSAT stores truly correlate to future SAT performance (according to the SSAT folks anyway), if you applied to a good school and were rejected with high SSAT scores, you will still do well in life. :)</p>
<p>When Getting Rejected Is Good
Apr 1, 2011 12:00 PM, By Lynn O’Shaughnessy</p>
<p>Do you need to attend an Ivy League school to make it big on Wall Street or Main Street? You might think so, and chances are that many of your affluent clients believe it too. This ingrained belief so many of us have that Ivy League grads enjoy a lock on the best high-paying jobs just isn’t true.</p>
<p>At least that’s one of the fascinating conclusions of new research by a pair of economists who created a commotion nearly a decade ago when they first compared the earnings of undergraduates of Ivy League schools and other elite institutions such as Swarthmore, Duke and Stanford with bright graduates of less prestigious schools.</p>
<p>Alan B. Krueger, a Princeton economist, and Stacy Dale of Mathematica Policy Research, conducted the original bombshell research, which has been cited countless times over the years by people who believe that America’s veneration of all things Ivy League is excessive. Thanks to the updated research, these skeptics now possess even greater ammunition against the Ivy worshippers.</p>
<p>To appreciate why the latest findings are so compelling, you need some background on the original research.</p>
<p>In their landmark study, Dale and Krueger discovered that the average earnings of Ivy Leagues graduates were similar to the average earnings of students who were accepted to one or more Ivy Leagues schools, but who chose to attend a less selective school. If a student got accepted to Columbia University, for example, but decided to attend Penn State or Xavier University in Cincinnati, the graduate was very likely to enjoy the same kind of earnings power.</p>
<p>This finding shocked a lot of people who assumed that the Ivies and other elite schools provide a superior education or at least offer students access to amazing networking opportunities that aren’t available on other campuses. The research, however, suggested that high-achieving students are likely to enjoy the same earnings success regardless of where they obtain their bachelor’s degrees.</p>
<p>In other words, the secret ingredient to financial success is not the elite colleges themselves, but the caliber of the students that these schools attract whether or not they attend. I’ve always thought that you could lock a bright, ambitious freshman in a closet at Harvard and that student would emerge four years later with promising career prospects. Harvard and the other elite schools get way too much credit for the undergrads they produce.</p>
<p>The original research was based on 1995 earnings of students who graduated in 1976. In revisiting the issue, the economists cast a wider net by looking not just at what happened to those original graduates, who are now in their 50s, but also to a larger cohort of Americans who were college freshmen in 1989.</p>
<p>In the follow-up study, the earnings parity for Baby Boomers who spurned Ivy League institutions in the 1970s, and those who did attend these schools, remained strong.</p>
<p>The researchers detected an even more amazing earnings phenomenon for the younger crop of college graduates that they studied. The economists concluded that students who possessed Ivy League-worthy standardized test scores, but were rejected by these elite schools, still managed to enjoy the same kind of earnings success as students who did receive their undergraduate degrees from the colleges at the top of the food chain.</p>
<p>The highest-ranked school that rejected a student is a much stronger predictor of that student’s subsequent earnings than the average SAT score of the school the student actually attend, the study observed.</p>
<p>This actually makes sense if you think about it. The sort of students who apply to schools like Dartmouth or Williams are an elite self-selecting group. The students who aim this high are not only intelligent, but typically motivated, passionate and just plain talented. All are traits that can boost graduates’ chances of success in a future career regardless of where they earn their degree.</p>
<p>In an email exchange I had with Krueger, the economist noted: Students who apply to, and are accepted by, elite schools are likely to be high achievers. High-achieving students are likely to have high earnings regardless of where they go to school.</p>
<p>There are some notable exceptions to the findings that smart students who apply to elite schools can make Ivy-comparable salaries regardless of their alma mater. Black, Hispanic and low-income students, as well as students with parents without a college education do appear to benefit from attending Ivy League schools.</p>
<p>Krueger offered this explanation: While most students who apply to selective colleges may be able to rely on their families and friends to provide job-networking opportunities, networking opportunities that become available from attending a selective college may be particularly valuable for black and Hispanic students and for students who come from families with a lower level of parental education.</p>
<p>Bottom Line:
Those who are stressed about college (prep school) that getting rejected from a phenomenal school could be their teenager’s ticket to future financial success.</p>
<p>^^Interesting and does make some sense to me. However, along that line of thinking, could we say that if our kids are strong enough to be accepted into selective boarding schools, we should save the $45K per year and keep them in our mediocure public or private schools in our area for four more years, knowing they’ll grow up just as successful as those going to boarding schools? If you have a smart, motivated high-achieving kid, they’ll succeed, especially given various learning opportunities one may get in today’s world especially with some financial resources (much less than 45K) - why bother even explore boarding schools that are expensive and away from home?</p>
<p>@DAndrew - my argument against that option (keep the $45k and the kid at home) is that it is often the secondary school environment and education that helps catapult a student into that high achieving mold. </p>
<p>Not all students are highly motivated and achieving at age 13.</p>
<p>Not all but we are talking about those who got into selective BS, just like the ones that got into the selective colleges. Then all these selected won’t be as motivated as expected in BS or in college.</p>
<p>I think we forget the meaning of education again…</p>
<p>We should appreciate the process not just look at the end result.</p>
<p>No one can guarantee that people graduated from elite BSs or colleges would get a higher pay or prestigious jobs. It is the learning experience and the school culture you acquired from that shape you an unique person.
It is the character development not always $$$$</p>
<p>So if you can afford the tuition, why not? Can’t afford it then its another story.</p>
<p>^^thank you! I thought this would be the last place I should read that “elite schools” don’t matter. If we don’t believe schools make a difference in even the finest “raw material” then why are we here?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well said. HKnewparent</p>
<p>Highly motivated kids will succeed no matter where they end up. And BS has never been a guarantee of anything.</p>
<p>I’ve seen too many unhappy kids struggling and stressed out because their parents think of BS as the equivalent of Willie Wonka’s golden ticket. It’s just one of many stops on the journey. A lot of saavy kids have been highly successful without going to BS. I have no doubt the same would be true for my own had she chosen a different path.</p>
<p>Interesting case with Krueger: He went to his local public high school in New Jersey with a high-achieving guy who badly wanted to go to Georgetown and then make his mark in politics. Everyone in town loved this guy and he was regarded as a shoo-in at Georgetown, especially once the alumni interview made it clear that he never had an interview as amazing as the one he had with Krueger’s high school classmate. But the guy didn’t get into Georgetown. He ended up going to Delaware and, oh yeah, just as everyone predicted back in high school: he’s now the governor of New Jersey.</p>
<p>Here’s the Master Po to Cricket takeaway from this: Just because the path isn’t the one you expected to take doesn’t mean it won’t lead to the desired destination.</p>
<p>Does everyone believe that getting to “desired destinations” has everything to do with the individual and nothing to do with what school one goes to? We can interpret what we read the way we want but that seems to me is what the article is trying to say.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep. Smart saavy students somehow find a way to push forward and succeed no matter the environment.</p>
<p>DAndrew–I struggle too with the idea of what is the high school BS value. I think it boils down to odds. There will always be the Krueger type that would have been successful anywhere, and smart kids usually rise to the top in PS (although not always for various reasons), but presumably a BS education with give kids the tools (communication skills, writing ability, critical thinking) to improve their odds for success in life (however that is defined). We’ve been pretty skeptical in our Ds case, but even as she is still a work in progress at 16, I do see signs of her stretching/rising to challenges that she may not have done floating through PS. No magic fairy dust at BS, but perhaps hopefully, a foundation that will serve her well as an adult.</p>
<p>erlanger, thank you for showing that genuine inquisition in your post. If you go to the college forums and raise “private vs public schools” (don’t even hint that you are for boarding schools), you’d get an earful of how public schools are just as great if not more so than private schools and that private schools don’t help one’s success at all. Which is understandable as the private school goers are only a small fraction of the population and that is represented on CC. What surprises me is that some people in prep schools forum apparently hold that view as well. </p>
<p>Is “experience” all you are after when you send your kids to these elite schools? Do you still believe that these schools do indeed help your kids be more successful (or have meaningfully better chance) in the future than keeping him in a mediocre public school or private school? So are Delaware and Georgetown (or your average PS and an elite boarding school) all the same in shaping the success of anyone with Krueger’s calibre (in other words, is he an exception or the norm)? Are the differences in the quality of different schools and their different impact to our bright and motivated children’s future all something in our head?</p>
<p>I don’t think there’s a universal truth here…which is what I think too many people are trying to spell out or defend and that’s why they’re failing.</p>
<p>In my case, the takeaway is not the twisted around observation that the school is irrelevant. My point – mostly directed at those who ended up surprised and disappointed on March 10 – is that the unexpected route can also get Junior to a happy place.</p>
<p>To be frank, I shouldn’t have used “desired destination” because some people (imo) have pretty screwy ideas of what constitutes a goal for their children so I used it because it, with some trepidation, because it fit the metaphor. Similarly, figuring out what path makes the most sense is a tricky puzzle to solve. Not only may the goals be warped…but the idea of how to get there might be warped, even if the goals are spot on.</p>
<p>Take Gov. Christie. If he had gone to Georgetown he might have been Governor of NJ 8 years sooner. Or he might have ended up as some lobbyist making a decent living doing totally unrewarding work buttonholing Congressmen and bending their ears about subsidies for pig farmers. Nobody can say – although plenty will try.</p>
<p>What we do know, and only with the benefit of hindsight, is that he ended up in a large university community, with a demographic similar to the one he now serves, and he stood out (I believe he was Class President all four years at Delaware) and honed his ability to reach out and connect with his constituents in a way I doubt he would have acquired at the School of Foreign Service or anywhere else in Georgetown. I know that he doesn’t look back and dream about what might have been. It’s clear that he got what he was reaching for by using a dramatically different springboard than the one he originally imagined he needed to get there. And one of the keys to that was that he always understood that he was not derailed because of one college’s decision at a very early point in his life.</p>
<p>This is not to say that it’s a mistake to follow the path you’ve plotted out. Or that it’s irrelevant. You try to do what’s best for your child. And you try to create opportunities for them and give them an edge and advantages here and there…but sometimes we’re not as smart and wise as all that. Things happen along the way. And kids – particularly ones who are gifted and have had the benefit of good parental decisions along the way – are pretty darn resilient.</p>
<p>I’ve known Krueger and Christie – and also Harlan Coben in that same high school class – since grammar school. They went to the public high school. My parents were the ones who worked extra jobs to pay for my private school education at a fantastic prep school. I’m the one posting on College Confidential and, to my knowledge, they’re not (although Christie does send his kids to my high school, so I have that much validation I can cling to, right?)</p>
<p>This reminds me of the adage, “Where there’s a will there’s a way.” Some people will achieve and accomplish their goals no matter what the obstacles, and with very little opportunity, simply on sheer will and desire.</p>
<p>I think many of us are trying to help our kids achieve their dreams and think that private schools are opportunities to challenge them, give them the right tools that will assist along the way and for a lifetime, and help them to develop and reach their potential. It doesn’t always work that way though and some with sheer will and determination will achieve their goals despite little opportunity where others given lots of opportunities won’t make use of them or reach their potential.</p>
<p>As parents, all we can do is try. And Students have to take every advantage of opportunities that come their way.</p>
<p>I think of the guy who won the literary pulitzer featured on CBS news last night, who immigrated to the US from Guatemala. He was given some opportunity at the LA Times, but certainly not afforded a private high school education. But he made use of his opportunity and had a little luck along the way.</p>
<p>Randy Pausch, the famous computer science prof who wrote the “Last Lecture,” quoted the first century AD philosopher, Seneca," Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." I think many of us parents are trying to help our kids achieve preparedness through the “best” education (we think) we can provide.</p>