<p>just read an article mentioning that the best 29 high schools in the nation for prestigious college placements of their graduates, according to the Wall Street Journal. </p>
<p>Could someone givethe full list of those high schools. Thanks</p>
<p>It may be this:</p>
<p><a href="http://webreprints.djreprints.com/images/1018890612719tuitiondollars.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://webreprints.djreprints.com/images/1018890612719tuitiondollars.pdf</a>
<a href="http://webreprints.djreprints.com/1018890612719.html%5B/url%5D">http://webreprints.djreprints.com/1018890612719.html</a></p>
<p>but there are more than 29</p>
<p>The list is flawed because the list of colleges used as a criterion variable is flawed. I don't pay much attention to this list. Rather, I look at what national-level ECs are most persuasive when young people apply to college programs in particular subjects.</p>
<p>Very odd list- did you notice how small most the class sizes were for the top 20 or so....20% of 100 students is much easier to acheive than 20% of 600...</p>
<p>What is the point of this list? I don't get it. </p>
<p>Yes, these schools send a fair percentage of their populations to "prestigious colleges" But, what "prestigious colleges" exactly. And, what is the percent of the total enrollment at those colleges from these schools? More kids get into these "prestigious colleges" from high schools that are NOT on this list than from high schools that ARE on the list. And, finally, in honor of our dear Mini, all this really shows me is that if you have the money to send your kids to these expensive private high schools, you probably are pretty darn well educated yourself, and, dare I say it, maybe even went to one of these "prestigious colleges" yourself. Which, of course, is the combination (wealth plus well educated parents) that is really underlying these kids' chances at the "prestigious schools." It is not so much where they go to SCHOOL as it is WHERE they come from that matters.</p>
<p>So, what exactly is the point of this list? I still don't get it.</p>
<p>its a very odd list indeed....its pretty useless imho....</p>
<p>its all about the legacy</p>
<p>my parents attended two of the most "prestigious" universities in the nation and graduated first in their respective class..... of course, these colleges are Yerevan State Conservatory and Yerevan State University (in the Capital of Armenia) so...... legacy didnt really count for me</p>
<p>but, I'm sure that if I ever wanted to go to those colleges I wouldn't even have to take the entrance exams, hey, at least I have a backup in case this whole US education thing dosen't work out :D.... jk</p>
<p>
[quote]
But, what "prestigious colleges" exactly.
[/quote]
I wondered that, too, until I found the 10 listed in a sneaky sort of way in the text article:
[quote]
Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, the University of Pennsylvania, Cornell and Brownsupplemented by three of the most exclusive colleges in the West, Midwest and South. These were Pomona, the University of Chicago, and Duke.
[/quote]
They claim they were unable to get data for Columbia or Stanford, and that they verified by checking against Williams, Amherst, and Caltech and came up with the same answers. Whatever those were.</p>
<p>Odd list indeed.</p>
<p>wow. people are way too obssessed with the college admissions process. I don't understand it, people think that a top-notch education is everything. The people that go into those schools make the schools what they are, the schools don't create the people. The first kid, with the obssessive father saying
"If you go cheap, you're not going to get what you're hoping foran Ivy-class school," needs to get a reality check. Paying 20 grand for private school is ridiculous, especially when similar public high schools will get you into the same prestigious universities.</p>
<p>My S's public central city HS placed more students in selective colleges than the captioned Lakeside School. Sixteen are going to Stanford alone (whose data were left out of the study). The school also has a sizable neighborhood population who do not typically go to selective colleges, so the numbers by percent are not representative of the programs offered for students who can take advantage of them.</p>
<p>my h.s. has some of the best placement around:
4 yale, 2 harvard, 2 mit, 2 stanford, at least 10 browns, at least 10 penns.</p>
<p>mm..not all of these are private.</p>
<p>The article doesn't make clear how they got this data (?from the high schools themselves) or if all U.S. high schools were polled. I'm sure there are other high schools that have acceptance rates to these combined schools higher than the 6 or 7% listed here.</p>
<p>hmmmm, this list is very tilted toward the east coast. for example, if stanford had been included in the data, Paly and Gunn (both in Palo Alto) would have outranked several of the east coast schools - Gunn, for example, sent 20 students to Stanford last year.</p>
<p>As someone noted, location matters. East coast school admissions seem to be biased toward the east coast (last year, I was told that Yale's admit rate in the San Francisco bay area was 5%, compared to the nationwide 9-10%), and from my experience with stanford, it seems like west coast admissions might have the same sort of thing going on. ergo, by including mostly east coast schools in the data (and not making it EXPLICIT at the top of the list that stanford's data was not included), this list gives a picture that is very misleading. </p>
<p>There are plenty of absolutely amazing west coast schools... but if they send kids more to Stanford and UC Berkeley etc. than the east coast ivies, these west coast schools are getting shortchanged by this list.</p>
<p>idad are you in Seattle?
Daughters high school has a board of college acceptances- I glanced at it yesterday and it looked like there was really a lot of the "selective" east coast schools and it appears that the lobbying from the Brown admissions director paid off .
I wish they would put the wall of rejections back up though-
I would rather just see a list of what schools students are choosing to attend than a list of the acceptances.</p>
<p>all these top highschool rankings are about how much money your parents have. the top public schools are in the good neighborhoods with higher priced houses.</p>
<p>emeraldkity4: Yes, I am in Seattle. My S's school has a wall of rejections, or did until the principal had it removed, the student's protested and it was reinstated, but absent some early posts. I think it is somewhat therapeutic and takes some of the sting out of the rejections.</p>
<p>The article explains that the data came from the colleges. This is why Stanford and Columbia were excluded, because they wouldn't provide the data.</p>
<p>Of course, larger schools might have more students attending the colleges on the list. I think the point of the article is % of students from each HS going to the selective college. </p>
<p>And, no, not all of the schools on the list are reserved for the powerful and wealthy. I can speak for one of the school , GFS (Phila), where 20% of the student body is URM.....and many, many students are on aid - and aid is abundant for anything needed, not just tuition- heck, if you can't pay for the prom, no problem, just ask!. The school sits in the middle of a neighborhood that is riddled with crime and poverty (for all of you who are afraid of Penn's neighborhood, you ain't seen nothing!)....and they've done some amazing things with the community....including opening the campus to the neighborhood (library, gyms, campus, all OPEN to anyone who wants to make use). The students are "edgy" and tough......not coddled brats worried about where to park their Beamers. And then the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) offered the school money to move away from the city and into a sprawling suburban campus, they said "no thanks, we'll stick it out"....while other local privates pulled up roots and left town quicker than you can say "Ivy". And when the local gangs started to beat up on the GFS kids recently (hospitalizing one this year)....the school reached out to the community for help, in an embrace, not a "us vs. you".....and the community responded. The mothers/siblings of the perpetrators turned their OWN kids into the police (and that's saying A LOT for poverty stricken single moms of black sons who are out brutalizing others). And peace was restored....and kids are safe.</p>
<p>But, the article wasn't about that...it was about how many of these kids go on to a few selective schools. </p>
<p>So, maybe a good article for this school would have been "Schools that teach more than SAT prep, don't have AP/IB, refuse to rank, won't calcualte GPA, hold ethics as top priority and work really, really hard to develop charachter in students.......and STILL send this many kids to top selective school....but don't ask us about it because we'd rather discuss other things - and, oh, have you noticed that we're pretty darn inexpensive?"</p>
<p>Sorry - not to run a commercial. But, dismiss the list all you want. You can't dismiss the value of a tremendous opportunity...and when it happens to show up on a WSJ list, all the better.</p>
<p>I think we must be at the same school :)
quite a PTA meeting last night-
I am used to much more laid back meetings- alternative school parent ya know ;)</p>
<p>Yay for Hunter College High School (#9) =)</p>
<p><em>proud</em>
Public and proud of it. </p>
<p>This WSJ thing is a bit old. We don't even have "Physics and PostModern Culture." </p>
<p>Our school is not one of those wealthy suburban schools surrounded by all the rich people and their nice pretty houses. We're funded by CUNY, run by Hunter College, with students from all five boroughs of NYC. It's really one of the poorer and more neglected high schools in New York, especially compared to the more "famous" Stuy, BxSci, etc. </p>
<p>I just wanted to say this because I don't want anyone getting the wrong idea about Hunter--that it's one of those aristocratic high schools filled with wealthy legacies--just because it's located in New York next to all the fancy bluebloods' schools. A chunk of the seats are saved for the economically disadvantaged, and a huge number of students live in the outer boroughs and must commute to school.</p>
<p>To address neobez' comment
[QUOTE]
all these top highschool rankings are about how much money your parents have. the top public schools are in the good neighborhoods with higher priced houses.
[/QUOTE]
</p>