<p>
</p>
<p>Is that its purpose? If so, wouldn’t listing the number of grad who attend 4- and 2-year colleges suffice?</p>
<p>I thought its purpose was to give other students the ability to compare themselves against those admitted to a particular college, in order to assess their chances.</p>
<p>momofsongbird…I love you…barron is a dyed in the wool government knows best lackey</p>
<p>It’s better to get more detail about the colleges than just who is going to college. The school can look to find what is and is not working in getting kids into competitive schools. You don’t need names to do that. Just the data. Over time you would have a very good database and could adjust your classes and requirements to what works better.</p>
<p>And I’m hardly known as a pro big government person here Solodad newcomer.</p>
<p>Totally in response to the rather acidic “paranoid much?”. I agree totally that the more precise information will as in any model result in a more accurate and useful tool. I think you may have missed the OP which concerned mandatory reporting which even you must admit smacks of government intrusion in our personal lives. certainly even a “senior member” would agree.</p>
<p>There is much government required reporting that is very useful and I have no problem with. The Census for starters. Companies have to report lots of employment, wage and other data that allows people to judge the economy. Schools should know about their products too and get feedback in a numerical form that they can use. My college required that if I wanted to use the placement office I had to report job data. That data is very useful to both the college and prospective students. Information is good and more is better so long as you don’t report any individual results.</p>
<p>Couldn’t Naviance be set up so that you had to indicate that you would give your info as a condition of getting the password?</p>
<p>Sorry barrons we will just never agree. I’ve owned a small business for 30 years and I know first hand the real cost of big government and who pays for it.</p>
<p>barrons is HARDLY a liberal, solodad. I think you’re barking up the wrong tree on that one.</p>
<p>But Barron’s individual results ARE being reported - at least for some kids. (Although reporting of any kind is limited in many places to HS juniors, seniors and their parents - so Mr. John Q. Public who wants to know what the results are for the taxes he pays, unless he’s got a junior or senior in school - he’s out of luck)</p>
<p>In the case of Larry Lacrosse above, although Pizza can’t seem to get her head around it, for anyone from my town (and thus anyone with access at my local high school’s naviance site) not to know who the kid is and where he goes to school, they’d have to be braindead.</p>
<p>Combine that universal knowledge with a naviance graph for that school having an acceptance dot off by itself well below even the rejections and it is indeed obvious to anyone with access to the school’s naviance system “at a glance” who that dot belongs to. First reaction might be “huh?”, but the second reaction is going to be “Oh, that’s “him””. Which is different than for a similar hooked dot for someone with less local celebrity, where the reaction would more likely be “Oh, that must be someone with a significant hook”</p>
<p>Is it a big deal? probably not. Does this particular kid care? I doubt it. But the fact is that even in districts that spend a lot of time and money on things like privacy, they don’t necessarily do them in an effective or logical way.</p>
<p>My district is uber sensitive about privacy.</p>
<p>For example, the Haverford graph would not display for privacy reasons because there were too few (four) acceptance data points. None of those accepted had actually attended. Even if one WAS “nosy” (and then some!) I’m not sure how it would be possible able to determine who from the school over the past several years had been admitted to Haverford but gone elsewhere. Never mind then trying to match that information up correctly with the graph. Nor can I imagine why anyone would want to do so.</p>
<p>Yet this information was blocked because of privacy concerns while the other obvious data was not.</p>
<p>And if for some reason the kid whose data was obvious didn’t want his data shared in such a way, it ought be his choice - and nobody else’s business why he didn’t want it shared.</p>
<p>Barrons, I don’t think anyone on this thread objected to providing this information on a voluntary basis – it was the threat of fines (which the school has now backed down from) that ruffled a lot of feathers. </p>
<p>There may be many reasons a particular individual may feel uncomfortable about disclosing data. It may even be in an effort to help protect the integrity of the data itself - for example, the student may be aware of circumstances related to college rejection that have nothing to with stats – perhaps something innocuous such as failing to send the midyear transcript to a match college after receiving an EA admission to a preferred college; or something more serious, such as some sort of disciplinary infraction that impaired the college application process. </p>
<p>So why forward bad data for inclusion in the system? How is it going to help some other student down the line to see a data point showing that some student with a 2200 SAT and 3.9 GPA got rejected from Mediocre U… if there is no way for them to ascertain the additional fact that the student didn’t bother following up on apps after his EA admission to Prestige U? Maybe that student helps the others most by sharing the Prestige U info and leaving off the data from the colleges with the halfway completed apps.</p>
<p>calmom, good point. Our school reports as applications on Naviance, any college to which they mailed a transcript. There is no way to know if an application was ever submitted, or recommendations or official scores were sent, or required interviews were completed…and the HS’s reports to the public don’t have an “incomplete” category, which makes me wonder if the program itself allows this option. The category that is reported is “withdrew” (as if applicant were accepted ED or EA and pulled their other apps), which is not the same thing. I am confused about rejction status too–maybe someone can enlighten me–do colleges officially reject a student who does not send in all components of an application?</p>
<p>Nobody wants fines but my take would be if you want to use the school’s counselors you agree to report your data. As others noted, when there are too few data points it does not go on the public reports. It’s still useful to the guidance staff and the school in general and should be reported. They already will know pretty much where you applied. There will always be data quirks too but with many schools having a few hundred grads per year the oddballs won’t change the trends. And if everyone already knows about some kid that got in or rejected what is the big secret that will be outed?? Most could not care less anyway. Or you don’t even put it on a public site and just use it for internal purposes. That’s the main reason to do it anyway–to learn and get feedback on the class for the professionals…</p>
<p>calmom, good point. Our school reports as applications on Naviance, any college to which they mailed a transcript. There is no way to know if an application was ever submitted, or recommendations were sent, or required interviews were completed…and the reports to the public don’t have an “incomplete” category, which makes me wonder if the program itself allows this option. The category that is reported is “withdrew” (as if applicant was accepted ED or EA and pulled their other apps), which is not the same thing.</p>
<p>PG, my understanding is that it’s an institutional subscription. Again, the point is, full data. If a third of the class opts out of providing the info, the resulting composite info available has limited value for the entire student body. If I were the administration I would insist on full participation (again, for a private school) as a condition of enrollment. I can promise you that the second question inquiring parents usually ask is, “Tell me about your college admissions.” (Percent going here, percent – or absolute number – accepted there, etc.)</p>
<p>Providing college admissions information is a key aspect of business health for a private school, a feature of their competitiveness with similar schools. And internally, having Naviance is a point of attractiveness to potentially enrolling families as well – so that an individual student has a context for his or her college list.</p>
<p>Things like subscriptions to this and that service are routinely evaluated each year by a school administration. If too many of the families don’t like/don’t find useful/ a particular service, and have provided that feedback, the school will on its own disenroll in that service.</p>
<p>
There are anecdotal reports on CC of students who didn’t bother to complete apps who were surprised when they received acceptances. So I don’t know what an individual college may or may not do. There are all sorts of shades of gray on the “not completing” part, as well.</p>
<p>
At a public high school, the school has an obligation to do certain things for the student. Sending out transcripts on request is one of those obligations. The school’s counselors are also paid to fulfill a certain set of tasks – the student isn’t obligated to repay them in any particular way for doing their job. It may be a nice thing to do – students aren’t obligated to write thank-you notes or give teachers end-of-the-year gifts, either, but they do so routinely – but there again is the difference between doing something voluntarily, or being forced or coerced to do it.</p>
<p>My kids did not attend schools using Naviance – something I appreciate. (I think Naviance is a crock anyway, or at least would have been in the context of the type of schools my kids attended.) My son’s g.c. was a very nice lady but did absolutely nothing to help guide his college process – he had to do a lot of reminding to make sure things got filed on time, including the paperwork for his National Merit status. Both my kids were expected to take care of obtaining and ensuring mailing of teacher recs on their own. </p>
<p>I don’t want to sound unappreciative. The staff at my kids’ schools were busy and sincere people who did their best, but there wasn’t much hand holding.</p>
<p>Fines?! Laughable and it wouldn’t fly where we live. The district would be in a heap of trouble with parents if it tried this. (I see from post 170 that the school has now backed down on the fines bit.)</p>
<p>My kids did not use their school’s GC or Naviance graphs at all when determining where to apply; nor did they report their data to the school. We all looked at the graphs once when we initially gained access, and decided it was too easy to figure out which dot belonged to whom for many of the schools.</p>
<p>I wonder how truly useful Naviance is anyway. My kids applied mostly to holistic schools, so they would not have been deterred by being an outlier on the graph, as they had some outstanding ECs to offer. I assume that most of the stat info on Naviance is probably consistent with published admissions data anyway.</p>
<p>The administration knows where all the students ultimately matriculate - they do not need to know any more than that.</p>
<p>
That’s why I question its value.</p>
<p>I can see the use as an internal tool for guidance counselors at a school with a large student body regularly applying to multiple selective colleges. At least it gives a benchmark for the g.c. to look at that is tied to the specific school. The g.c. would also probably have the resources to figure out that outlier A was a recruited athlete and that outlier B is the daughter of the guy who’s name is on the new library building at Ivy U. </p>
<p>In the hands of students and their parents, though … it looks to me like fuzzy math. Bad assumptions going in … bad assumptions coming out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There were some on this thread who debated whether students should even have to provide the name of the college where they would be matriculating. Even for schools without Naviance (ours did not have Naviance), a list of colleges where recent grads have enrolled is part of the School Profile, which accompanies transcripts with college apps. I can’t understand how some on this thread thought students did not need to let their HS know where they would be enrolling.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is the purpose of including this information on the School Profile? Is there a belief that if High School X sends 2 students to Harvard let’s say, then their graduates are more attractive to colleges? I don’t see why it would even matter.</p>