<p>
</p>
<p>Just as growing up in a family w 3 kids is a different experience than growing up in a family with 2 kids, increasing the size of the student body would change the intrinsic experience at that school.</p>
<p>Also, why make a school more accessible if the school derives cachet from being inaccessible?</p>
<p>^^That’s a good point. As in many other matters, there are different stakeholders. For those kids who are highly qualified but couldn’t get in the door of these great institutions, they are too small and exclusive, relative to the resources they have. Many of them wouldn’t mind a somewhat different experience in a school with 600 vs 300, or 800 vs 550 students. The difference is too small to them compared with their alternatives. I do understand though that to keep the operation of a bigger school relatively similar to that of a smaller school (eg faculty/student ratio, class size, extracurricular activities and sports per student etc), it takes thorough planning and significant investment. And I don’t expect it to happen any time soon…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are a fair number of schools which provide great educations with 600 or 800 students, or 1220 students. They’re taking applications this year–as they have been for years before. I’m not sure what the world would gain, should Groton or St. Paul’s decide to double their size. The very act of changing the size of the school significantly would change the experience provided.</p>
<p>My children attend/ed small boarding schools, and a large part of the experience is knowing just about everyone on campus, including the teachers who don’t have you in class, the maintenance people, the head, the crew coach, etc. There are theories about the number of people any human can know well; that number is well below 800. “Dunbar’s Number” is 150. [Dunbar’s</a> Number Kicked My Ass in Facebook Friends Experiment | Underwire | Wired.com](<a href=“http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/03/dunbars-number-facebook/]Dunbar’s”>Dunbar's Number Kicked My Ass in Facebook Friends Experiment | WIRED)</p>
<p>It’s great that Yale is expanding the number of residential colleges–but notice that it’s doing it by adding two new residential colleges, which are small residential communities. The university itself is much larger than Groton or St. Paul’s, but the undergraduates are divided into smaller colleges, to provide social context to the students.</p>
<p>Periwinkle, I get how important it is to you to have a small school where you can know just EVERYONE on campus, but I did answer “what the world would gain, should Groton or St. Paul’s decide to double their size.”, except they don’t necessarily have to double their size. Thanks for sharing your point of view.</p>
<p>[Admissions</a> Recruits Diverse Applicants | The Exonian](<a href=“http://theexonian.com/new/2013/10/10/admissions-recruits-diverse-applicants/]Admissions”>http://theexonian.com/new/2013/10/10/admissions-recruits-diverse-applicants/)</p>
<p>Talked about how Exeter AO’s reach out to middle schools and organizations like Prep for Prep and ABC to seek a diversified student body. It also talked about how they select qualified candidates. They mentioned the importance of standardized tests as well as interviews (I stand corrected for some of my misconceptions about interviews).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A tangential point: I remember when this study came out ([Which</a> Traits Predict Success? (The Importance of Grit) - Wired Science](<a href=“http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/03/what-is-success-true-grit/]Which”>Which Traits Predict Success? (The Importance of Grit) | WIRED)) thinking to myself that smaller, highly selective boarding schools are liable to weigh more intently and measure more accurately these sorts of precursors for success than a larger, highly selective school.</p>
<p>Parlabane, good article! Thanks for sharing it. Can you elaborate why you think “smaller, highly selective BS are liable to weigh more…”? To me, things like test scores are “hard” measures to predict a student’s “readiness” but “grit”, “self-control” and “sustained performance” are soft measures that are more suitable to be predicted by teachers’ recommendations, interviews and academic performance over time. Both the “hard” and “soft” attributes are needed for future success.</p>
<p>Benley, in part it’s math and in part it’s social consequences. The ratio of files/kids/parents to an admission’s officer at an Andover or an Exeter is greater than the ratio at a small 250 kid school. More time devoted to the application motion at a smaller school improves accuracy. On the social consequences front, an ill-advised admission at a 250 kid school has a greater impact than at a school with 1000 kids. A not-very-nice Beethoven at Exeter is less impactful on the community than at a St. Andrews or a Thacher. Just a function of pond size. </p>
<p>I am not making a value judgment about big schools vs. small. After all, the big school ends up with Beethoven so there are clear advantages. That study on grit is interesting to me because of the connection it makes between soft measures and final outcomes. I associate smaller schools with having the time to do the extra digging necessary to unearth and assess some of those softer qualities and the need to weigh differently their impact on the admission of a student and the community.</p>
<p>OK thanks for the clarification. Frankly, I think schools of the size of all boarding schools, bigger or smaller, considering what a tiny fraction of the population they educate, are not set up to produce many Beethoven’s, at least not enough so enough data can be used to prove your theory one way or the other. To me, by and large, the purpose of formal schooling even the elite boarding schools is not to produce Beethoven’s and the like. It doesn’t mean there couldn’t be one pop up here and there from time to time, but it’s hardly the result of what the school does. If anything, I think the structure of a boarding school in particular is more likely to do the budding genius harm than good.</p>
<p>Excellent post. I think that people need to set realistic expectations, and be more aware of what we called in our family “wait list hell”. On March 10, my son got 1 acceptance, 2 rejections and 4 wait lists. We were thrilled with his acceptance, and he’s there now! But wondering and waiting to hear more info from the wait lists was very hard. We declined 2 (we felt the fit was better at his accepted school) but would have strongly considered the other 2, given the chance. The odds of getting off the wait list are so low, that I think the kids would be better served by simply being rejected on 3/10.</p>
<p>We started the boarding school journey just expecting to clue our DD into the fact that there was a world beyond her sheltered suburban life. Modest ambitions but valuable nevertheless. We didn’t expect to become complete fans of the boarding school experience. The application process including writing essays that stretched her perspective and the interview process, was a great experience for her that validated parental nagging. DD had a 50% hit rate. She was upset by some of the rejections but ended up at her first choice. There were definite tears at the rejections but also a wake up call.</p>
<p>peteri, that’s a good summary of the take-away from the application process. Indeed, “there was a world beyond her sheltered suburban life”. No matter how the outcome turns out, that’s something valuable to have, a motivational factor for a kid who has been used to coasting through school so far. Just as you pointed out, part of our “exit strategy” was to tell DC that if nothing else it was a chance to find out if “you are as good as you think you are”. Sure enough, there the wake-up calls, loud and clear!</p>
<p>I know I am late to this conversation, but my d interviewed at a small boarding school recently and she and the admission officer discussed an article (or maybe just the concept) about the importance of grit. During my interview with the admissions officer she mentioned that the headmaster and the admissions office had been focusing on the importance of grit and how it was a better predictor of success in life.</p>
<p>There was this thread,</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/prep-school-parents/1213593-nyt-magazine-article.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/prep-school-parents/1213593-nyt-magazine-article.html</a></p>
<p>@GiaNghi: Test scores are important (and yours are in the competitive range for top schools), but they are only one piece of the puzzle in admission decisions. So make sure you are doing your best on other pieces you have control over (eg grades, ECs, interview). At the same time, manage your expectations. As an international student who needs significant FA, you are fighting an uphill battle. Doesn’t mean it can’t happen, but unless you have some sort of “hook” we are not aware of, you need some luck on top of a killer application to make it happen. Good luck!</p>
<p>The original source of the importance of grit concept is a book that came out last year called "Why Children Succeed"or maybe it was How Children Succeed but in any case it was a fascinating look at the latest educational research on bridging the achievement gap, how stress shuts down learning etc. One of the most frequently quoted points was a study that showed character traits such as resilence are better predictors of success than high grades and test scores- It is a science book rather than a how-to book (title is a little misleading)</p>
<p>I think I remember reading that Choate is now giving applicants a supplement of some kind designed to measure these character traits and that they are moving slightly away from relying on the traditional matrix as well</p>
<p>[Choate:</a> Choate’s Self-Assessment: A Groundbreaking Approach to Admission](<a href=“http://www.choate.edu/news/item/index.aspx?linkid=7096&moduleid=241]Choate:”>http://www.choate.edu/news/item/index.aspx?linkid=7096&moduleid=241)</p>
<p>I believe Choate started using that form at least 5 years ago… Nevertheless, whether grit or resilience is being evaluated as a predictor or a more important predictor than grades/scores for future success, I believe highly selective and academically rigorous BS are aware that it must be an important trait of their students as it is of immediate relevancy to them if nothing else. If a kid doesn’t have it, they’d better pick it up quickly otherwise it’d become awfully difficult to survive in the so-called “pressure cookers”. Judging from the low attrition rates across the board, these schools are doing a good job in identifying the right kids.</p>
<p>Choate’s assessment was developed by Robert J. Sternberg. He outlines his work in detail: <a href=“http://www.igs.net/~cmorris/a-new-model.pdf[/url]”>http://www.igs.net/~cmorris/a-new-model.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>He developed the WICS model, which stands for Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity, synthesized.</p>