<p>I heard that at hunter a lot of the students are really smart, but don't care much about academics. It doesn't matter much though because they're still smart enough to get into whatever college they want</p>
<p>don't know if the same is true about stuy</p>
<p>I go to a private school and last year 8% of the class went to princeton. We're not even that well known</p>
<p>"I heard that at hunter a lot of the students are really smart, but don't care much about academics. It doesn't matter much though because they're still smart enough to get into whatever college they want"</p>
<p>Uh...I go to Hunter, and I can assure you that while there are kids who are smart but unmotivated here, there are a lot of kids who do care about academics.
I won't dispute your last statement, though.</p>
<p>One of my professors at a summer school I took was a teacher at Stuyvesant. Great teacher, if that's any indication of the school's quality. </p>
<p>I didn't meet any kids from Stuyvesant at the program, but I did talk to a guy from Horace Mann who would say stuff like "ew I would never go to Harvard even if they accepted me, gross"</p>
<p>I saw your post that IMSA is the school with the highest suicide rates for high schools in the country. Can you please send me the site? I am a freshman and I made it into IMSA last year, but decided to wait a year before going. I don’t want to go if they have high suicide rates, so please send me the site!</p>
<p>it’s incredibly overrated. it’s a bunch of kids who are good at standardized tests. they aren’t necessarily great college applicants. it’s just a meat grinder of sadness and failure, basically.</p>
<p>10.6 percent of Regis High School’s Class of 2008 enrolled at one of HYP, and 7.0 percent of Hunter College High School’s Class of 2008 enrolled at one of HYP.</p>
<p>Both of these schools are tuition-free, the former favoring boys from middle and working class immigrant families, the latter the City’s best public school. Both are far more diverse, ethnically and intellectually. Both are selective to the extreme, both are well-respected, and both offer a rich and rigorous learning experience in small classroom settings.</p>
<p>Admission to Stuyvesant is a pure meritocracy, and the sole factor considered is one’s performance on a single-sitting standardized exam.</p>
<p>As someone very familiar with Stuy, I would say that it’s a great public option in NYC. It is by no means better than some of the other selective publics or some of the privates, but it is a great school, and anyone who argues otherwise hasn’t done their research.</p>
<p>kwu: I respectfully disagree. I don’t know anything about Regis’ admissions process, but Hunter’s is very similar to Stuy’s and to the rest of the selective publics I’m familiar with in that it is very testing-based. The sole factor for admission to Hunter is testing, albeit a Hunter-specific test. I would also disagree that Hunter is “far more diverse than Stuy, ethnically and intellectually.” There’s a substantial East and South Asian population at both schools, moreso at Stuy, actually, and a larger immigrant population in general at Stuy. And as far as intellectually, I can say that having met dozens of Stuy students during my time at Hunter I really don’t see any clear academic or intellectual difference. Most students I know at one school would be absolutely fine in the other. There are differences, of course, notably size and Stuy’s stronger focus on the sciences, but to say that the two schools are tremendously different and that one is much better than the other at anything as general as pure academic performance or intellectualism is just silly.</p>
<p>Many people of unextraordinary intellect get in to HYP. However, I don’t think there are many flat-out stupid people at those schools, save for a few insanely hooked individuals.</p>
<p>I go to Stuy and I love it. And I’m a normal, social kid. Yes, there is a lot of work, but if you’re more-or-less disciplined, the work load is completely manageable. Most kids don’t spend all their time studying, there are parties, activities, and the kids as a whole are going to be so successful in the future. </p>
<p>Stuy is a great place for people who want to take the initiative to better themselves. I went to private school for a long time, and personally I like the public school experience better, and the kids are as a whole so much more motivated.</p>
<p>And as for the suicide concern, please, Stuy is so far from the top of the charts in terms of suicide rates. There have been deaths because of freak circumstances, but not primarily because of suicides.</p>
<p>One word. INTENSE. For a while, I wanted to go to Stuy but got out of it because I eventually won a scholarship to an elite private school instead. Had that not happened, there would be a good chance I would be sitting at Stuy/Bronx Science. Stuy is the type of school that teaches you discipline, but at the same time, there is no time to be average. You MUST bust your ass all the time and compete against your peers to get to the top, which sucks. Also, those schools are not diverse at all (full of Asian kids and Jews). I’m pretty sure my school with $31,000+ tuition has more blacks and hispanics percentage wise that Stuy. Honestly, if you thrive in an environment like that, then I say go for it but I know that my high school experience would be a lot worse had I gone to Stuy.</p>
<p>@kwu: although hunter does send a larger percentage to HYP than stuyvesant, stuy consistently has high raw numbers of people going to HYP. In the class of 2009, nearly 25 people alone matriculated to Harvard. I don’t even want to think about the cumulative number for HYPMS–>bad memories,ugh…
and cornell. oh god, the droves…</p>