Is Exeter too hard? Also for Andover

<p>There is a recent research done by a CC member. He defines top schools as top 25 universities and top 15 LACs as ranked in US News and World Report. For the past 5 years 61.8% Andover graduates, and for the past 3 years 55.6% of Exeter graduates, matriculated into one of these schools. You may also find stats of other boarding schools and each schools hisotrical matriculation into HYPMS, Ivies, and strong schools (top 50 universities and top 25 LACs). [Boarding</a> School Stats : Matriculation Stats](<a href=“http://matriculationstats.org/boarding-school-stats]Boarding”>http://matriculationstats.org/boarding-school-stats)</p>

<p>As for the highly selective few such as HYP, it’s true that there has been a downward trend for elite boarding schools. How can there not be? It’s a cross the board trend. Ask any unhooked students (non URM, non recruited athelete, etc.), whether he is the valeditorian in his public school or a top student in a private school, they’d tell you it’s very very hard. The admission to these colleges simply has become much much more competitive. If you are trying to reach the conclusion that by attending Andover or Exeter, one is not necessarily gaining advantage in getting admitted to HYP then may be you are right. However, by staying back in one’s public school or a private school with “fewer talents” one’s chance is not necessarily increased either. The truth of matter is that even fewer students get into these colleges in other high schools and to be the top 1 or 2 in that pool is not necessarily easier than to be in - say the top 15% - of the Exeter/Andover pool. Then of course, this is just generalization. At the individual level, a particular student may be better served in a public school with enough family support and a less challenging curriculum, while another student may be able to thrive in an environment like A/E where she’s surrounded by quality teachers, motivated peers and abundant readily available opportunities.</p>

<p>You have raised an interesting point about grades and grade inflation in A/E. My take is that unless some sort of weighted GPA is implemented, the grade inflation is bound to happen. In the long run, you will see students are carefully evaluating the risk of taking a challenging class to protect GPA. The advantage in college admission of taking a particularly difficult class with lower grade than taking a moderately diffcult class with a higher grade is not clear. While colleges do look at one’s transcript more carefully than an employer, there is no documented evidence that taking risks and challenges for more difficult classes is encouraged. The truth is that it doesn’t have be a disadvange. As long as it doesn’t have an advantage, students would be discouraged to take more difficult classes.</p>

<p>The funny thing is that the logic used by exsrch actually encourages grade inflation. If hiring managers (or adcoms in college environments) don’t evaluate grades in context and just pursue high GPAs, then students will be correct in focusing on gaming the system to get the highest GPA possible (e.g. choosing easier programs, cherry picking courses and sections to get lenient graders, taking lighter loads, etc.) rather than the best preparation for the future. That may explain why I’ve met more than my fair share of management consultants that seem more interested in creating a facade for the client than in providing meaningful analysis and value.</p>

<p>As for the examples I gave, it is true that in isolation (rather than as indicators of a larger group of comparable schools) they don’t change Andover’s numbers significantly. However, last year I took the time to study Andover matriculation versus the admittedly simplistic but readily available USNWR rankings. The posting is probably still available on this site if you search for it. I wanted to know how far down the university and LAC lists I would have to go in order to cover 2/3 of the class of '09. The answer was 25. In other words, 2/3 of the class went to a school listed in the top 25 on either list. Given the nearly 3,000 4 year institutions in this country, that represents the top 1%-2%. I’m pretty satisfied that is a reasonable definition of “top schools”.</p>

<p>Frankly, I’m tired of this argument because it seems predicated on two things: (1) Students that don’t matriculate at Ivy+SM or some other arbitrary classification are not happy and/or well-served with the result; and (2) They would have had more success in achieving their goals by being the big fish in a smaller pond. At least initially, number 1 is certainly true for some. There are tears on March 31, but the overwhelming majority of students seem quite satisfied with their choices and even those that aren’t may realize in a few years that they ended up in a wonderful place. As for #2, March tears fall at public schools too. MIT just rejected 80+% of the valedictorians that applied. The figures for Harvard and Yale will be even lower. Lacking a multi-year control group study we’ll never answer the “Am I better off being a big fish in a small pond” question, but I know that Andover offers tremendous academic opportunities, most graduates seem very happy with their secondary school experience, and the vast majority end up with a variety of excellent post-secondary choices - even if not all are among the approximately 1/2 of 1% of high school graduates that matriculate at Ivy+SM institutions. </p>

<p>Lastly, I know from first-hand experience that those in the middle-50% (25th to 75th percentile) at Andover can matriculate at institutions covered by even the most restrictive definition of “top schools.” I’m reminded of it every time I write a tuition check.</p>

<p>Those who say it’s better to be a big fish in a little pond don’t seem to appreciate how restrictive a little pond can be to some fishes. </p>

<p>One can only grow as big as the pond.</p>

<p>Two comments to this interesting thread.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>I interview for Harvard. They have a system where all applicants are interviewed by an alumni. I don’t know how much the interview report is counted in the admission decision, but we do get to see all the candidates. I have been doing this for a long time. The students that I see range from very average, to astounding. Most of them at the astounding end of the range. Most are from public schools, but some from private. The public school applicants are what anyone would call superstars, great scores, 8-12 AP courses, tons of extracurriculars, personality, etc. Very often the top kid in the class. Bottom line: very few get accepted to Harvard. I very rarely interview someone who gets admitted. Maybe every 2 or 3 years, and I do 6-8 interviews a year. It’s like a lottery really. At least half of the students I interview would do very well academically, and be a big addition to their class. They just don’t get in.</p></li>
<li><p>Harvard, and all the other Ivies are just not that much better than many other schools. I have been to several Ivies, and State Universities. There are great teachers, great courses, and great friends at all of them. There are several hundred superb colleges in the US, big and small, for students to choose from. This focus on the Ivies as the be all and end all for high school students is really misplaced. It matters much more where you go to graduate school, or what company you work for when you go out, than what college you went to. Just check out the Biography sections of any major newspaper. I know that Andover and others judge themselves by how many students get into top schools, but they would do better for their students if they matched them with the school that fit their personality, interests, and ability.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Just sayin.</p>

<p>I’m not sure I agree with pa.pa that there are several hundred superb colleges in the U.S. (seems like an excessive use of the superlative), but I think we agree that there are far more than the ten used to create an artificial matriculation metric. As with most things in life there is a continuum from superb to atrocious with many gradients in between. Perhaps most important, a motivated student can get an excellent education at a superb, very good or good college - but not if that motivation is used purely in pursuit of grades or the easiest path. </p>

<p>One thing that I’ve learned from adcoms at selective colleges and respect greatly, is their focus on identifying kids that challenged themselves within the scope of available opportunities. That certainly doesn’t require going to Andover/Exeter/Choate but could be a kid taking the toughest course load including multiple APs at a good public school or one at a poor public school that pursues self-education and additional relevant work outside the classroom. Those kids will be best equipped for success at Harvard/Stanford/MIT/Williams or Texas/Illinois/UConn/Maryland or (insert choice of non-name brand school here). Given the degree of difficulty they’ve volunteered to face, that’s one reason why lower half graduates from Andover/Exeter/Roxbury Latin (or for that matter Boston Latin - a public school) matriculate at colleges and universities that most American high school graduates would kill to get into despite the fact that some with post-secondary tunnel vision might not see them as “top schools.”</p>

<p>I think - to some people at least - going to Harvard is not just for the benifit of going to Harvard. They know well that they don’t have to to be in Havard to find “great teachers, great courses, and great friends”, but rather getting admitted to Harvard is a clear indication of success in high school. Not all top students can get in Harvard, but the ones that do are the very top students in their schools. (Well, not in absolute terms, but it’s fair to say you are a top among URM candidates, or a top among legacies, or a top among recruited atheletes…) The glory surrounding the Harvard title is what matters. Is it superficial? Yes and no. Yes because how does this glory matter after all? No because college admission is nowadays just like a super competitive Olympic game (more like figure skating, where skills/techniques definately counts but artistic expression and impression on the judges can turn things around too) and winning IS glorious.</p>

<p>Padre,</p>

<p>Here’s a test. Go to 5 people you admire, who you think have done well in life, and who you aspire to be like (or would like your kid to be like). Ask them where they went to college. If one of the five went to an Ivy, I would be surprised (This test does not work if you live in Boston or NYC, there it will be 2/5). There are at least 200 excellent, even superb, colleges in the US. That’s only 4 per state. I am thinking of places like Hamilton, Brandeis, Oberlin, Reed, etc where the students and teachers are exceptional. Not to mention the great state and land grant universities in every state.</p>

<p>Oops. I meant to comment on this:</p>

<p>“I know that Andover and others judge themselves by how many students get into top schools, but they would do better for their students if they matched them with the school that fit their personality, interests, and ability.”</p>

<p>I’m not so naive as to think Andover isn’t thrilled when it generates matriculation stats that place it on the top of certain ratings. However, I think the college placement office does try to manage expectations and align kids with appropriate schools. If anything, it is the kids and their parents that tend to over-emphasize a particular list.</p>

<p>We never sensed any pressure from my daughter’s counselor to apply to particular schools. We’ve heard horror stories on this site about being pressured to enroll at a school because of its name. We’ve also heard stories of kids being discouraged from applying to multiple big name schools so the school could broker admissions. After my daughter was admitted early to her first choice name brand school she applied and was subsequently admitted to several others on the commonly cited “top schools” short list. I encouraged her to look at other options to ensure she was making the most compatible choice and FA was a concern due to business being down and decreased valuations in the kids’ college funds. As long as she had a well thought out plan and appropriate rationale the counseling office was fine with that.</p>

<p>

For whatever reason, this is the tough reality. It takes time for a sea change in culture. Individuals can opt out of the “game” and many do already. Private schools on the other hand must work with the reality, otherwise they’d lose out.</p>

<p>pa.pa, I think we are actually in agreement more than we disagree. I live in the NY/Boston belt and most of the people I admire still didn’t go to Ivies. That’s why I made a point of saying that a motivated student can get an excellent education at many schools not considered by those with tunnel vision. I’m just not sure I’d label all of those schools as superb. Even a very good or even good school will have some superb programs and some superb students.</p>

<p>For instance, I live in CT. I would consider UConn to be a good to very good flagship state university (improving every year in large part due to a $1+B infusion of capital from the state of CT in the last decade) with a few outstanding programs and some at the other extreme that are just OK. It’s a competitive national university that I’ve donated to even though I’m not an alum but I just would not call it “superb”. Nonetheless, I recently worked for a CEO that is a UConn alum. So much for the significance of my name brand degree - he made more money and if we disagreed on something guess whose opinion carried the day? </p>

<p>Similarly, among LACs Wesleyan, Connecticut College, and Trinity are schools that most kids would only dream of attending. Admittedly operating on less knowledge about them I’d put them in the very good category with Wesleyan possibly being higher. You might call one or all of them “superb” as your scale is slightly different. It 's purely a matter of degree and labels.</p>

<p>Last year while my daughter researched colleges I learned about fascinating West Coast schools like Pomona, Harvey Mudd and Reed that are virtually unknown on the East Coast. So I fully acknowledge there are far more schools that kids should be honored to attend. The qualitative labels you or I place on them really don’t matter.</p>

<p>Hey Padre, I’ll be the first to admit that most hired into consulting are not too good. Currently, my client’s firms have a 20-25% turnover rate per year and while I worked, a decade ago, at what was then and probably still is the most prestigious firm it was no different. Hence, although you find some amazing leaders the most are average.</p>

<p>I think the current evolution in the discussion is less interesting really because we are splitting hairs and I don’t necessarily disagree about the assessment for the top half of the class. The interesting part, in particular the implications, are about the bottom half of the graduates that are getting below honors and are average (or lower) performers at places like Exeter and Andover. Not sure if it was Worktowin or someone else said it but most admitted students and parents aren’t really thinking their kids are going to end up at the bottome half (or worse) - I surely don’t want to think that of my son but realize it might be a possibility.</p>

<p>Look, if the student in question, my son or a student at Exeter and Andover, are getting honors or higher the outcome is not disputable that they will have many more opportunities and get into a great school. Where it gets fuzzy is if your below honors or the bottom 1/3 it seems to get dicy. The problem with that is no one in the bottom third expected to be there and they are probably working pretty hard.</p>

<p>Even, the points TomtheCat made reinforcing the traditional BS benefit that if they apply early there is an explicit advantage for below average marks isn’t sustainable in what appears to be grade inflating environment. The reality is if your grades are on the lower side over time even early action/decision will be tougher to crack. Plus who wouldn’t want to take advantage of the point Tom made with a higher GPA.</p>

<p>My point is not about the people who are doing well but rather about the people who are not doing well. Benchmarking suggest my son is pretty smart with all the right metrics and no different than most kids who get into BS but I have no idea where he’ll end up - bottom half or top half and that is an uncomfortable feeling (if he get in cuz he was waitlisted to both schools)</p>

<p>Hey Padre, with respect to grade inflation or hiring that focuses on grades you’re absolutely correct as there is a supply demand imbalance - many more students with high grades than available positions. The cost of trying to determine if someone with a lower GPA might be a good fit isn’t a good use of our time as there are so many with perfect or near perfect GPAs from which we can get the same attributes we are searching for.</p>

<p>Additionally, you do see the very behaviors at the college level such as protecting GPAs and not focusing on developing and learning because we penalize them for low GPAs and this is not only indicative of management consulting but pervasive in our society - my personal views.</p>

<p>The good news is it is wonderful to see many young people learn from the mistakes and rise, over time, to conquer their short coming becoming competent professionals. I am sure it is similar to ad cons observe at all levels. I guess I am a ad con for professionals lol</p>

<p>

I guess a legitimate question to ask here is where you would expect such a student be positioned in a reasonably competitive public school or a private school with reasonably high quality students, and what their college prospect would be like? I wouldn’t assume they’d get on the top of the class but they could be among the top 50% or even top 25% depending on what school they are at, but you have to know what college options a student in that position with that school could have. They may just end up with a college at the same level as when he’s lower 50% of an Exeter or Andover class. Again, this is generalization. Individual results can vary.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Five of the top ten students at our public school last year are currently enrolled in community college.</p>

<p>So it is indeed true that:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Like most wildcards they, the bottom third, can be distributed into segments if they stayed in PS into:</p>

<ul>
<li> They got into the same schools</li>
<li> They got into better schools </li>
<li> They got into worse schools</li>
</ul>

<p>How the percentage are distributed would be anyone’s guess and more particularly based on the individuals.</p>

<p>I kinda feel bad the parents have stolen this thread. Sorry boys and girls didn’t mean to do that. Your thoughts and inputs are appreciated if you want to engage.</p>

<p>

Just one final thought. What’s your point really? Aren’t you trying to make generalizations about students in A/E? Why all of sudden it becomes “anyone’s guess” and “based on the individuals”? For individuals, there is right or wrong choice - they should choose where their potential can be tapped to the fullest, but you can’t say IN GENERAL A/E is the reason one ends up in a less than stellar college.</p>

<p>It needs to be understood that schools like Andover and Exeter function as more than mere stepping stones to college! To be quite frank, threads like this one make me quite angry because, 1) certain posters vacillate so heavily on their main point until they don’t even have one, and 2) Andover’s and Exeter’s college matriculations and testing statistics are publicly available so I don’t know HOW any posters here still believe that kids in the bottom 25th percentile of A/E’s classes, who score 1920 on the SAT and still can’t 100% manage their time after A/E, would somehow magically get into “top schools” were they to be back at their old schools WITHOUT THE PREPARATION THAT A/E AFFORDED THEM.</p>

<p>Hey Benley, I was generalizing about the students if we suppose they never came to boarding school and stayed at their PS/private school based on Neato’s comment about the top students she observed going to community college. Hence, if they stayed in PS and graduated they can be grouped into the three segments listed above.</p>

<p>Tom, if you were asserting I am going back and forth both based on Benley’s comments you’re a bit premature - see above.</p>

<p>Here is what I have learned from the discussion on this thread:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Fact: nearly half of all students at Andover get honors by getting a 5 or higher while at Exeter half of students get 9 or higher average</p></li>
<li><p>Not fact: This might imply grade inflation</p></li>
<li><p>Fact: recent numbers posted by Tom shows that those getting 5.5 or higher has gone up while the total number of students getting 5 or higher has dropped slightly</p></li>
<li><p>Fact: Number of students matriculating at the top 10 schools is declining but more than half of graduates matriculate at the top 25-50 schools</p></li>
<li><p>Fact: Given average Naviance numbers quoted by TomTheCat graduates from Andover with less than a five are at a significant disadvantage if not applying early</p></li>
<li><p>Fact: More than half of graduates get a great education and great school matriculations</p></li>
<li><p>Andover and Exeter have challenging curriculums but more than half of the students rise to the challenge and get similar distinctive and high marks as they had become accustom to while in other private schools or PS</p></li>
</ol>