There are so many great schools out there that get little air time. One of the schools we’re looking at had a line from a parent in a marketing video about wanting to send her son to a school where he’d “thrive, not just survive” and I’ve really taken that to heart. One of my questions now is “what is this school like for a kid in the bottom 50%, 20%, 10%?” I know that seems counter-intuitive to some, but let’s face it, half the kids going there will be in that bracket. Does a kid in the bottom 20% feel like they are barely keeping their head above water, or are they thriving in a great environment, even if they aren’t at the top of the food chain?
I’d love either feedback from students that have been in that situation or those that have insight.
My kids are applying now, but when my siblings and I went to boarding school I know that my brother probably fell into this category. He had some undiagnosed learning disabilities that weren’t diagnosed until he was in the small group settting at BS. He thrived there socially and while he wasn’t in the top of his class he had great support from his teachers, a learning center (tutors) and college counseling. He went to a good, small, private college and is a successful, business executive today. We didn’t go to one of the acronym schools, but it is one mentioned here as being a great school with a friendly atmosphere where kids can thrive. My parents were thrilled with the education we all received. Several of us went to top tier/ivies for college, so there was room for both high/low students at the same school.
I have to agree with @busymommyof4 As stated, fully half of any class will be in the bottom 50%. There’s just no way around that reality. But admissions picked their class assuming that the students chosen will benefit from the environment, and for the most part, all do.
Here’s the other reality. With limited exceptions (and then they are mostly assumptions which may be accurate), no student knows who is in the bottom 20% (or top 20% for that matter) so there is no stigma. And if you look at the schools profile, it’s unlikely that the GPA of the bottom quintile is 2.5. Most of these kids do well academically. It just happens that almost everyone does well.And while they may not go to HYPSM (and some in the top quintile don’t even want apply to HYPSM for various reasons), they’ll generally get into a good college. They are not banished to the University of South Central Vermont.
Nobody knows, nobody cares. It’s a cherry-picked group of high achievers from the start, and they stay that way right to the polished end. As ski points out, they all do well and land in great places. Here’s the important point: If they all come in as all-A (or close) students, that becomes the norm but, immediately, 50% of those all-A students are in the bottom half of the class (horrors, I know). But, the spread is not A-F, it’s more like A-C+, and the top and bottom halves are constantly changing because of that talent and drive. There is no pool systematically doomed to languish always at the bottom whose education is sub-par and whose prospects are dull.
However, there will be a few who do struggle academically for whatever reason regardless of supports and who do either choose to leave or are asked to leave if they cannot maintain good academic standing. These are exceptions, though, not the rule.
Since my GPA from high school to law school ranged from 2.9 to 3.0, I sort of knew I was in bottom 20%, but it never bothered me or impeded my career goal in any way because I had lots of work experiences and set up my own business Ended up being financially more lucrative and more enjoyable than working for large companies. I got all As one semester, and realized getting good grades did not mean I was learning more. I just liked to stray from course materials and learn various things on my own. That’s when I realized working for big companies was not what made me tick. Funny thing is I got into top schools based on test scores and other things. If you are the type who likes to follow your own rhythm and beat, bad grades shouldn’t deter you from achieving your goals. Good grades often give you a false sense of security.
Several kids worked their tails off at my college, got good grades and got into the same law school I got into, which at the time were top 5 or top 13, respectively: NYU and UCLA Law schools. They were pi**ed when they heard I got into the same law school with lousy grades. No, I was not URM. I just was more creative in my applications.
My son was a B student at Thacher, probably 40th - 50th percentile - not sure. He got the occasional C and the occasional A, but mostly the B range. He worked his tail off for those grades too. He had a number of friends who were staggeringly brilliant and got top marks all four years - the kind of kids who only need to read a math concept once and can then do any associated problem. But these differences in brain power did not really matter to his happiness and did not affect his ability to make a strong impact on the life of the school socially, extracurricularly and on the playing field where he was not a star athlete but gave it his all (and loved the game).
Even back then, he would always talk about maintaining “balance” in his life and would actually use that word to describe his approach to Thacher. That didn’t mean he wouldn’t feel stress with papers or tests; I know that he did. But he would always track back to that sweet spot where work was balanced against non-academic pursuits that he also found deeply fulfilling: the outdoors, riding, camping, being with friends etc. For him, the secret of being happy at, say, the 45th percentile, was deciding what worked for him, what his boundaries were, and then being happy with it. Had he been obsessed with matching the academic performance of some of his peers, he would have been a mightily unhappy kid. So my question back to you is what sort of internal compass will your child bring to the school? It makes an important difference.
Lastly, Thacher was happy with my son’s performance, effort and outcomes the way they were. The school felt that he was getting the most out of his abilities and giving back in other ways that helped to improve campus life. I don’t know if this “school attitude” is the same at all places. Others would know better.
I am agreeing with @ChoatieMom on this topic (alert the media). For most of the schools frequently mentioned on CC, the kids come in as a “cherry picked” bunch of high achievers. What we noticed was that there was not a large range of scores/grades - but an 89 is a long way from a 92 in the narrow view-finder of a student. Lots of scores compressed between 88-91, it seems. Moreover, the students coming in have varying degrees of academic backgrounds and levels. It’s much harder in my opinion to get a 95 in French 1 than to get that same grade if you are coming in taking French-4. Same thing with kids coming into 9th grade taking higher level math classes. What we were told by the school was that there will be students whose strengths and relative weaknesses will get sifted out more clearly in high school.
Also, @buuzn03 makes a good point and will add the DH has served on the admissions committees of two med schools. His tendency is to root for the well-balanced all-around good student (who has also had a “life”) than just going by the high GPA/MCAT.
I can’t speak from personal experience and really have no idea where DS falls in his class (and like many schools, they don’t rank). However, at his school there is a huge range of academic ability, from super smart kids who win all the awards, to the more run of the mill kids (like mine) — smart and motivated but not stellar, but well rounded — to smart kids with LDs or who may excel in one but not all subjects, to some who get through only with A LOT of support from all angles. But, in a similar vein to what others have said, every kid was accepted for a reason and brings something to the school community. Some are academic over-achievers, some are committed D1 athletes, some are artistic, etc., etc. I think these schools also draw out kids’ undeveloped talents — I am so often impressed by the level and variety of skills and talents. They all work hard and do better than they might have in a less personalized environment. While I don’t see any competitiveness in terms of GPAs, the kids do celebrate and recognize each others’ success and talents.
Depends upon the particular prep boarding school in question. At the very elites, as others have noted in this thread, each student has an area of strength in which they excel. Accordingly, the best math student may not be among the top students in the humanities, and vice versa.
I have seen many lists of students college matriculations. At a few schools, almost every graduating senior is headed to an elite college or university.
In answer to your question: “What is it like for a kid in the bottom 50%, 20%, 10% ?”
Not sure that any kids fit into such a broadly stated category as each student has strengths & weaknesses. All of the students seem to have a strength that gives them confidence & self validation. When applying to colleges & universities, the school states that it does not rank students.
Hmm, maybe the answer is, kid would be better off here than elsewhere. But the kids who are in the bottom are NOT going to elite colleges IMHO from any school even PA or PEA. Just too many kids who meet the “grade” They will still have the confidence and connections that they might otherwise not have. Sometimes connections down the road can help as much as where you studied in college.
In addition, while they don’t rank, they do report. Colleges know if someone was in the top quartile vs. bottom quartile and sometimes can get pretty close to knowing the rank based on the transcript.
It’s never fun to be in the bottom, isn’t it? Seriously, it could damage the self-confidence of some kids. Some of them can handle it but others can’t. There’re always people who got burned out along the way. For it to happen so early in HS could do some serious damage to some kids psychologically.
" But the kids who are in the bottom are NOT going to elite colleges IMHO from any school even PA or PEA"
Depends on how one defines “elite”, of course.
And, yes, there certainly are some students that are in the bottom half that do go on to even the most selective colleges and universities, typically because they have some other attribute (think sports as oneexample) that the institution values.
@Publisher Curious what schools you are referring to when you state:
“I have seen many lists of students college matriculations. At a few schools, almost every graduating senior is headed to an elite college or university.”
PA, PEA, SPS, and so on, matriculate a significant fraction of their graduating to non-elite schools. So do the top NYC schools such as Trinity School and Horace Mann.
Around 30% of PA and PEA graduates matriculate to what would be considered non-elite schools, based on 2016-2018 matriculation lists. For this categorization, I am referring to schools such as Tufts or Grinnell as “elite”.
Depends upon how one defines “elite”, of course. Typically smaller schools, but Phillips Academy at Andover placed extremely well, although Exeter did not.
At that time SPS & Andover came out on top. Groton was in one of the next spots. Some were day schools.
@publisher Are you thinking about recent years? Or years ago? There’s more data now and honestly I am not that close ( maybe someone else with a recent HS grad is). But I do know that the bottom half from even the best schools aren’t skating into elite colleges. By your measure, Tufts, for example. I would be very surprised if any kids at the bottom placed into these schools without mega funds, legacy+, URM and sports. Even with those factors, I’d be very surprised. Schools have ALL gotten harder. I’d love to know the source. Mainly because I am curious more than anything else. Maybe there is still a feeder school to elite universities.
Lack of resilience is one of the things boarding schools are looking to weed out during the admissions process. For the most part, the BS pools comprise kids who are challenged rather than damaged by the many small “failures” they will encounter on their way to graduation. Somehow, the schools seem to know how to filter for this grit. There aren’t a lot of snowflakes in the BS communities, and those who enter at the more fragile end do seem to blossom rather than wilt in the process. Anyone concerned about BS damaging self-confidence might not be ready for or a good candidate for this option. These schools build confidence in students, but they start with kids who have already shown strong tendencies toward resilience.
@ChoatieMom Agree with your points on grit and “failures” We did find one school for snowflakes, however. I’m sure that there are many more. Not everyone wants their kids to have grit. Sadly, some just want the outcome. And they never imagine their kid is going to finish last.
