Let the bragging start: the best private day schools

Parents Forum
101

<p>On the other side of the spectrum, I just watched ‘Waiting for Superman’ on my flight.</p>

102

<br>

<br>

<p>Both statements are correct. ;-)</p>

103

<p>I wonder what schools the Times factcheckers were worried about having been founded earlier than 1645 in the United States?</p>

104

<p>There was a school on there that I was admitted to but chose to not go to. I did a spend a day. The girls were ruthless to each other. The bullying was terrible. Whose chests were whatever and drugs/parties/arrests were the only conversation that went on that day. Apparently, there was a party over the weekend where there had been a drug bust and some of the kids had been arrested. But they were not kicked out. It seemed like an amazing school when I was visiting and going through applications. But once I was in and did a spend-a-day, I hated it.</p>

105

<p>

</p>

<p>The Collegiate School in NYC was founded in 1628 but shut down during the Revolutionary War while RL stayed open, hence the “continuous existence” term.</p>

106

<p>Busdriver has the right idea. I work at an elite private school, my son attends a different private school. While I am a proponent of excellent private education, obviously, it is ridiculous to assume the SCHOOL has done all the work to get those high scores on standardized tests (ACT, SAT, SAT Subject, AP…) Private schools have high requirements for admission. Also, parents who can afford the tuition can also afford prep courses, tutoring when needed and all sorts of enrichment opportunities. When you start out with the “best” kids (and I put that in quotes, because it means “best” on paper - already scoring high on tests and grades) you had BETTER turn out kids who are high-achieving in these tests.
High achieving public schools MIGHT be more fair, but, again, public schools are defined by geographical areas and districts in wealthier neighborhoods have parents who have the income to provide all those extras to their children, as well.
ALL lists ranking schools are ridiculous. It is important for parents and children to work together to find the right fit for the particular student.</p>

107

<p>Why am I expecting the Berkeley and Chicago fans to claim that their schools are the oldest high schools in the country? It could be such a nice addition to the ARWU and THES rankings! :)</p>

<p>On a more serious note, one has to wonder how the original private (and especially Catholic) schools survived and still fight to survive the relentless assaults by the “educational” powers in the United States. </p>

<p>Satire or not, this remains a view shared by many:</p>

<p><a href=“http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/Ganges1876.jpg/800px-Ganges1876.jpg[/url]”>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/Ganges1876.jpg/800px-Ganges1876.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

108

<p>Maryjay60 raises a good point that a day school is only going to be as good as the kids living in its geographical catchment area. So what good is a top day school in Boston to a kid who lives in Missouri?</p>

<p>Now boarding schools are a different matter, as they draw kids from all over the country and from all over the world.</p>

109

<p>People are so desperate for rankings on this site they’ll bite on any click bait. That website looks like it was launched a month ago for no other purpose than to create random rankings for largely low-grade colleges with some top schools mixed in for credibility. Why are their featured schools 3 for-profit online colleges? Credibility shot for me. Feels like a scam.</p>

<p>Obviously the people snuggled at the top of this list won’t question it but, with exposure to a number of schools on that list where I live on the East Coast, I find it surprising the Great Lakes don’t have greater representation outside Chicagoland.</p>

<p>It appears that it’s all about how much money is in a metro area that makes the difference on this list, but there are stellar private day schools around cities like Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Detroit that provide world-class opportunities and churn out students on par with anything I’ve seen on the coasts, usually for less money.</p>

110

<p>“That website looks like it was launched a month ago for no other purpose than to create random rankings for largely low-grade colleges with some top schools mixed in for credibility. Why are their featured schools 3 for-profit online colleges? Credibility shot for me. Feels like a scam.”</p>

<p>What…are…you…talking…about?</p>

<p>Are you posting on the wrong thread?</p>

<p>This thread is about the top private day schools…which refers to the top private high schools in the US that are not boarding schools.</p>

<p>Were you posting about a different link, or did you not read this one?</p>

111

<p>^
Son, don’t be condescending. </p>

<p>It’s an amazing concept called investigating the source of information. Look at the broader website that posted this list. Look at their collegiate rankings, largely for online degrees or acupuncture. Look at their featured for-profit schools.</p>

<p>The whole site comes off as a marketing front for online for-profit schools and they put the high school lists out as bait. Ergo, it’s hard to take them seriously on the topic of private day schools.</p>

<p>Edit: The site also promotes an extreme Christian / creationist agenda in the face of overwhelming evolutionary evidence: <a href=“http://tbsblog.thebestschools.org/[/url]”>http://tbsblog.thebestschools.org/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Very odd mixture. I just don’t get why a ranking from such a dubious source is a featured discussion. Does CC not vet these lists?</p>

112

<p>^^That just makes my day. I’ve never been called “son” before, that really cracks me up! Thank you, applejack, for making me laugh for the first time today…it has been a very stressful day. I mean that with all sincerity.</p>

<p>I don’t look closely at what sites are marketing. The reality is, they market whomever pays them to advertise. They all do, even sites that we might be near and dear to, if you know what I mean. I wouldn’t make any assumptions based upon advertisements featured upon a site. I’m sure you might have heard of most of these schools, and purely because the website is advertising for-profit schools means very little. That is just the reality that we live with in the internet world.</p>

113

<p>^
Well, I don’t know what else to call someone who, through text, essentially pats me on the head with a condescending “What…are…you…talking…about?” and then treats me like a lost puppy, all the while having no clue what she’s talking about. That’s how eager young bucks behave. Try being more respectful and informed next time you insult someone. </p>

<p>You’re still missing the point because you haven’t looked at the site you’re defending. It’s not about banner ads or pop-ups. It’s that the entire content of the site looks to be a front. The rankings they choose, the schools they rank, the blog post subjects… it just doesn’t pass the smell test.</p>

114

<p>I do apologize for coming across condescending, really I do. I understand your point about looking into the sites and the agencies that make these rankings, because you do have to understand what their basis is. </p>

<p>I’m not anti-Christian, so I don’t write off their opinions because of what a blog talks about. That is fairly irrelevant to me. I also looked at why they ranked schools the way they did, and I didn’t have any objection to what they chose to look at, as far as high schools. Colleges seemed a bit different to me, the choices they made…but I don’t always agree with college ranking parameters. This, “Why are their featured schools 3 for-profit online colleges? Credibility shot for me,” seemed off to me, as you are talking about their advertised schools, are you not? That means nothing, purely advertisement.</p>

<p>But I see your point that sometimes these rankings are purely a front for agencies to pimp their product. I don’t know if that means you can discredit everything. I generally don’t trust anyone.</p>

115

<p>Not to mention that the linked site is a blog which is against TOS.
Xiggi, you should know better.
:wink:
But perhaps Xiggi is also, like the site owner, an ID advocate?</p>

116

<p>applejack-</p>

<p>It’s even better than you let on. The site’s blog is a laugh riot. Heaps of prose steeped in outrage, written by Denyse O’Leary and James Barham. One can sum up their output as, “academy bad, Intelligent Design good.” </p>

<p>My school is quite high on their list, but I don’t find their praise anything to crow about. I’m also pretty sure that if they ever visited it, they wouldn’t be all that thrilled (which is something I would be willing to crow about).</p>

117

<p>Well, my kids school is extremely liberal, so I don’t know that they put any bias in that direction in it. Intelligent design, not discussed. So I don’t know that I can consider it biased because of a blog.</p>

118

<p>busdriver11-</p>

<p>Mine too. I don’t think they’re biased, just silly. And much as I love my school and think it really is outstanding, I’ll never be impressed by a ranking provided sans methodology. I may not like USN&WR or the Washington Monthly’s rankings, but at least they are semi-transparent about how they reach their conclusions. These folks, for all their concern about the incompleteness of the case for Darwinian evolution, can’t be bothered to warrant their claims. </p>

<p>Several years back the WSJ ranked us very high based on selective college admissions. They gave their methodology, which made it clear that the rankings were goofy. They based their rankings on the percentage of graduates who matriculated at Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Williams, Pomona, Swarthmore, the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins. A mere eight schools! They also skipped a number of great schools because they would not share their data. Based on this brilliant system, if a student turns down Pomona for Yale, or the University of Chicago for Cal Tech, that’s a negative. While current students and alumni were excited about the ranking, I felt compelled to point out its flaws.</p>

119

<p>Busdriver11 -</p>

<p>No problem. Apology accepted. I’m certainly not anti-Christian (I am Christian) either but I’m not going to put stock in a website that:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>lists only for-profit colleges when you click on “Find you school!” (meaning it’s not just an advertising section like you might find on the side or top of cc) and</p></li>
<li><p>has a blog that seems so unrelated to the rest of the site pushing a particular subgroup of a religion’s agenda. I guess my tolerance only goes so far, though, as evolution is an overwhelmingly settled science, so their ignorance on that subject undermines their credibility for measuring broader aspects of academia. It all ties together for me. A site can engage and respect Christian schools and perspectives along with others without pushing an agenda about it.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Maybe you’re just eager to defend your kid’s school’s high placement, which is fine. There are obviously no bad schools on that day school list. Just not really worth 8 pages of discussion from educated, discerning people, given the dubious source.</p>

120

<p>To me, it’s sort of interesting that such a dubious, crackpot source produced such an Establishmentarian list.</p>