<p>I am reminded of one of my S’s classes where 28 of the 100 students applied to Yale SCEA; most years, 35/100 apply to MIT from my other kid’s school. Huh? Suffice it to say that it is generally a bloodbath; on the other hand, these kids know they are not alone in their misery. These are at tippy top public programs with avg SATs in the mid-2100s at one and the mid-2200s at the other. OTOH, Naviance also made it clear which schools really liked kids from these programs and which ones would reject you despite the insane workload. </p>
<p>VERY tough to get into Stanford from around here without serious athletics and academics. </p>
<p>H&P tend to take students from our schools with the 2400s and 4.0s, but not necessarily the absolute toughest schedules (though very challenging nonetheless).</p>
<p>I apologize I am off-topic
“…SAT 2400s and 4.0s…”
I keep seeing this, but at our schools and our neighborhood there are tutoring classes that consistently produce a few dozen 2400 SAT kids (robots) even in sophomore years… We happen to know a few of them, their college admission results weren’t that great (no Ivies). Getting unweighted 4.0 is not that unusual too. I so wonder how important these are in reflecting academic results.</p>
<p>CountingDown, Interesting points. My kid’s school has a similar dismal record with Stanford admissions. If you look at the OP’s data, they had a tough time with Stanford as well, 17% admit comapred to 25-50% or HYPM.</p>
<p>Scores and grades are important, but if applying to schools which get lots of perfect or near perfect GPA and test score applicants, they are merely a necessary (in most cases), but not sufficient, condition for admission.</p>
<p>It may be that athletic talent and the desire to play in college may be an indicator of specific interest in Stanford for top students from our area who apply. (We’re on the opposite coast. I’m sure S, like many other schools, wants as many folks as possible to enroll.)</p>
<p>Dadwith2sons, not all 4.0s are the same; depends on the classes offered. S1’s HS offered a sizeable number of post-AP courses. We know a number of kids who went directly into graduate courses upon matriculating to college. We also know some kids who chose the state universities vs. Ivies because of that early access to graduate work and research. </p>
<p>Not every tippy-top student aspires to an Ivy.</p>
<p>answering Texaspg - "Where are they going with the 2400/4.0? "
A few in state schools (UVA, UCB, UCLA), and most in USC due their generous NMF scholarships, some actually gotten USC full trustee scholarships.</p>
<p>Having a 4.0 won’t help, not having a 4.0 will hurt.
Having a 2400 will help, not having a 2400 won’t hurt (as long as it’s 2300+).</p>
<p>6 people at this school got 1600 M+R. They are going to: Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Columbia, and Berkeley x 2.</p>
<p>And @DadWith2Sons: Schools like TJHSST and Stuy weed out 95% of the applicants for each entering class, so it is not fair to compare them to open-enrollment public schools.</p>
<p>After speaking with such authority on the issue, would you mind sharing your sources? Or shall we assume your information is merely based on hearsay and idle speculation?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is that a fact? How about looking at the Class of 2010 … 3 to Harvard, 0 to MIT, 1 to Stanford. Perhaps a slow year? Let’s look at the last 4 years … 12 to Harvard, 3 to MIT, 3 to Stanford.</p>
<p>Perhaps you did not mean to write GOING to THOSE schools?</p>
If you believe me, fine. If not, don´t. I am not obligated in having to prove anything, especially to you. If you are so knowledgeable, why don´t you tell everyone what you think. Oh wait, I missed the “idle speculation” part. Maybe it is my readin ability. Why don´t you ask everyone on CC to prove their view, or am I special?</p>
<p>xiggi - why don´t you put me on ignore, it would be better for everyone.</p>
<p>Unless you personally see the score reports, it’s probably a lot of bragging. It is extremely unlikely that a “few dozen” exist at one school, and if it did occur, I’m sure it hit the local news. (pls post source)</p>
<p>There were less than 300 2400’s in 2009, and less than 400 last year. And that is worldwide.</p>
<p>Well, it’s hard to believe you when you post information I happen to know is wrong. Simply stated, your numbers for the other school admission statistics were misleading.</p>
<p>I also know that you have posted a number of erroneous posts about Stanford; all indicating you do not have much knowledge about the school, its students, and its environment. I would not dream about discussing the finer points of attending Cornell with you. But, then I do not make unsubstantiated commentaries about that school! </p>
<p>I believe it is fair game to ask you to support your statement about the children of faculty having to be admitted by contract. While we can all agree that, as it is the case in most universities, the families of faculty and administrators benefit from special consideration, this stops short of being offered guaranteed admissions.</p>
<p>One should not be so callous in casting aspersions about the academic achievements of students she knows nothing about. </p>
<p>And, as to your last question, I do not consider you special.</p>
<p>Oldfort, I don’t have a problem, but it seems you find it objectionable to be asked to shed some light on the source of your allegations posted in reply to the OP. </p>
<p>Frankly, I do not see why it was necessary to write “Stanford professors´ kids get admitted to Stanford not because they are more academic, it is because they get preference.” as a “caveat” to the data submitted in the OP. Regarding the guaranteed admissions, perhaps you did know something we, common mortals or children, had not been aware of. It would have been easy to state where you heard that story. </p>
<p>Lastly, is it objectionable to expect people to post accurate numbers when THEY made a comparison, and opine about being non-impressed with the result of another school?</p>
<p>And, that is the extent of MY problem with your first posts in this thread.</p>
<p>My current senior’s high school did not do well at all in ivy and other selective school admissions this year. Did much better in earlier years. But they did get great acceptances for the middle 50% of the class. We were delighted with our son’s spread.</p>
<p>Haven’t checked the other kids’ high school since I have no one there any more. Their results were always very good, but their super Naviance system which indicates “hooks” tells you exactly why. Very high test scores, rigorous academics and lots of hooks makes for high caliber admittances. </p>
<p>You know, I don’t think Stanford is well represented at all, come to think of it, even from that school. Don’t remember anyone going there. To USC, yes, and CIT and the Claremont schools, but not Stanford. I wonder how geographically diverse Stanford is.</p>
<p>I don’t believe the profs have auto admit for their kids. Don’t know any who do. My friend who is a prof at a major university had her D rejected this year. She knew the admissions folks well, too. They did give her the special courtesy of letting her know in advance that her D who was in the mid range of the stats there was not getting accepted and why. I know a number of full professors and none of them have the guarantee. Granted, their kids might have preference (though some don’t even have that) if you know the adcoms or are in the celebrity range, but it isn’t as strong of advantage as one would think. Very good friend is a prof at an ivy and has yet to get any of his kids accepted. The youngest will likely get an acceptance, but he is truly top grade. The kids within range were not accepted or even waitlisted. I would be very surprised if Stanford accepted all the professors’ kids.</p>
<p>Just noticed name of high school and the reference to the suicides. Something clearly wrong there. YOu don’t get 4 suicides in that short period of time regardless of family issues especially for a top performing school like this without something that is not right. This is my brother’s school district and he has made remarks about this that point to some real issues. Not worth those acceptance stats, in my opinion.</p>
<p>As I stated earlier, my nephew goes to a high school in Palo Alto. My SIL is friends with some professors and their families. My best friend’s husband’s father is a professor at Cornell and was a professor at UPenn when he was going to college. He could have gotten a free ride at UPenn, but decided to go to Berkeley instead. His father was not happy about having to pay for Berkeley, but he was able to get in state tuition after a year (it is not the case any more). Someone I worked with, who is much younger than me, went to Cornell and whose father was a professor at the school also. He said he got a great discount(not free) because of his father, and because it was a contract school, he only had to pay room and board.</p>
<p>At my kid’s private secondary school, they offered free tuition to their teachers, AND with some highly desirable teachers (like math), they guaranteed admission. D1 graduated 4 years ago. I haven’t followed the school’s more recent admission record. Even with 3 students enrolled at Harvard in 2010, when the graduation class is 125, is still a pretty good record. </p>
<p>Again, I do not understand all the animosity.</p>
<p>My kids could have free tuition at the university that hires my husband, but as far as I know they still have to fulfill the admissions requirements. Unfortunately on a list of a hundred universities, they’d probably put it number 100. I think that’s the way it normally works. Tuition breaks yes, admissions no. (And I know an awful lot of professors!)</p>