<p>davida1, may I ask what boarding school you attended?</p>
<p>University of Chicago has a great reputation because of much more than just the graduate faculty. Also, many members (probably most) of the graduate faculty (except med/law school perhaps) DO teach and interact with undergraduates. And it IS self-selecting to a large extent. The application is very unique and takes time to complete (no common app) and the intellectual environment is not for everyone.</p>
<p>Surely you jest. Nobles does not approach Roxbury Latin let alone Andover or Exeter. BB+N is a good ways below a number of other Independent School
League members as well.</p>
<p>Ok, continue to believe Chicago's excuses for its lack of selectivity and unimpressive UNDERGRADUATE program (not graduate, again). Regardless, I will not reveal what boarding school I attended on an anonymous board, but I will say that it has been mentioned in this forum probably several times. BB&N has actually done quite well lately in terms of college placement. Roxbury Latin is kind of a strange place and its curriculum is very unique with its language requirements, its focus on the classics, and the fact that it is small/all-boys. From what I know about Roxbury Latin if you don't get into Harvard (which many students do), you're out of luck. A lot of kids end up at weak, overpriced LACs. The whole Exeter and Andover fascination is really for people who aren't in the know and are choosing schools based on name recognition and not prestige or academic quality. Anyone knowledgeable about prep schools would choose SPS over both in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>BB&N indeed does quite well on college placement. In 2005 (I don't have 5-year stats handy), it placed 26% into the ivies. By way of comparison, Andover placed 30% and Roxbury Latin placed 37%. It's a bit of a myth that graduates of Roxbury Latin only go to Harvard and a bunch of lower tier schools. On any normalized (for its size) metric of college placement, Roxbury Latin shows excellent results.</p>
<p>What's BB&N?</p>
<p>Andover's 2006 percentage is 27% of graduates (rounded up) ended up at Ivy League colleges. BB&N stands for Buckingham, Browne, and Nichols School and its percentage for 2005 is 23%. Both are about 1/4 of students. Andover used to be closer to 1/3. Here are my numbers for the top day schools and boarding schools that offer college matriculation statistics on their website:</p>
<p>Boarding School Ivy League College Placement (Top Ten)</p>
<ol>
<li> St. Pauls School 31%</li>
<li> Deerfield Academy 30%</li>
<li> Phillips Academy 27%</li>
<li> Groton School 27%</li>
<li> Milton Academy 25%</li>
<li> Phillips Exeter Academy 24%</li>
<li> Lawrenceville School 21%</li>
<li> Middlesex School 20%</li>
<li> Choate Rosemary Hall 18%</li>
<li>Hotchkiss School 18%</li>
</ol>
<p>*If full information in terms of class size was not available, <a href="http://www.petersons.com%5B/url%5D">www.petersons.com</a> was used</p>
<p>Day School Ivy League College Placement (Top Ten)</p>
<ol>
<li> Brearley School 40%</li>
<li> Collegiate School 39%</li>
<li> Trinity School 37%</li>
<li> Winsor School 37%</li>
<li> Horace Mann School 34%</li>
<li> Spence School 33%</li>
<li> National Cathedral School 33%</li>
<li> Dalton School 32%</li>
<li> Pingry School 30%</li>
<li>Chapin School 29%</li>
</ol>
<p>*If full information in terms of class size was not available, <a href="http://www.petersons.com%5B/url%5D">www.petersons.com</a> was used</p>
<p>David-
Why are A/E for people who "aren't in the know"? More importantly, since you didnt attend either, how can you proclaim your education at some seperate boarding school was somehow better? I attended PA, and now go to an Ivy, the education I recieved there was great but it would be fruitless/ignorant to go here and try and evaluate how my education there was somehow more meaningful than at another prep school. By and large, they are all fantastic educations with engaged, and brilliant teachers. Your percieved dislike of Andover/Exeter seems to be rooted in jealousy or some complex about attending a "less respected" prep school. In either case, deal with it, and only give advice for schools you have actually attended or experienced first hand. Your statement that SPS is somehow objectively better is born out with no proof or facts. Just tell me how/why St. Paul's is superior?</p>
<p>Also, your discussion of UChicago is elitist/uninformed. Interning this summer at one of the 3 largest financial management firms in the country, the only undergads they recruit either attend HYP, MIT, or Uchicago. Its an extremely well respected school amongst those with the real power, i.e. with the ability to hire and fire.</p>
<p>"The whole Exeter and Andover fascination is really for people who aren't in the know and are choosing schools based on name recognition and not prestige or academic quality. Anyone knowledgeable about prep schools would choose SPS over both in a heartbeat."</p>
<p>Davida, I'm glad you're so loyal to SPS, but implying that for people "in the know," SPS has better prestige or academic quality than A/E is ridiculous. To echo what others have said, you cannot possibly evaluate the educational quality at other schools besides SPS because you did not attend them. All you provide for evidence is questionable anecdotal evidence and Ivy League matriculation rates, which others have already pointed out do not necessarily indicate better educational quality. </p>
<p>Come to think of it, even if we were going to use that as objective evidence, statistically you can't compare Ivy League matriculation percentages at A/E vs. St. Pauls because of the different population sizes. If you took any statistics at all at St. Pauls, you might have learned that assuming two populations have equal variances is unreasonable. For example, if a School X had two students and one got into Harvard, according to percentages, your assumption would be that School X is better than Andover because it has a 50% Harvard matriculation rate. But we all know that isn't true because the sample size skews the outcome. Although this is an exaggeration, St. Pauls has less than half the student population than Andover or Exeter, so it cannot be compared to the latter two schools.</p>
<p>But let's forget about mathematical numbers. How could you possibly be so arrogant to presume to know more about these other schools than their very own current students and alumni? You may be familiar sure, but "familiar" is a far cry from intimate knowledge of their inner workings. NOBODY an make a sweeping generalization about the top few schools. Once you reach a certain point, small variations are negligible in objective data are negligible- it's about personal choice. How could you speak for both minority students and non-minority students? Conservatives and liberals? You can't. Nobody can. All the evidence you have is YOUR impression of their graduates. Nothing of their individual experiences. </p>
<p>Additionally, a true measure of a school is each individual student? So, if they don't possess some conforming quality that doesn't make them a "good graduate?" Preposterous. All of the top prep schools consistently produce intelligent, well-educated, successful graduates. I don't see what other "critically important quality" you feel top schools need to produce to prove themselves as excellent schools.</p>
<p>I think your thoughts are well-intentioned, but misguided. It is true, the larger schools are not for everyone. You need lots of determination and initiative to shine at Andover or Exeter. Students are not coddled and it is possible for some to slip through the cracks. It may be easier for some students to shine at smaller prep schools like SPS or Deerfield or Middlesex. You could say the same for their own public schools back at home. You just might well save the 30-some-oddK per year and do fabulously in your public school back at home to get into Harvard. But then you wouldn't have the extensive resources or intellectual environment of the larger boarding schools. It's a trade-off, and everyone has to find a balance. I would venture though, that your defensiveness about smaller boarding schools like St. Pauls is unfounded. Let aspects like student happiness and alumni giving speak for themselves without starting your own slander campaign.</p>
<p>rasberrysmoothie, you just smeered SPS, MX, and deerfield. Come on your'e better than that. It wasn't long ago you were still wet behind the ears with bs. Understand that had you chosen a small school you would defend as you defend a larger school. Good Luck !</p>
<p>This is what I mean when I said the small school get&%&^^%. When someone says anything that may be negative about the larger schools, it's almost as if your'e offended. You then defend them by smeering the smaller schools. Hmm, I find that offensive! Coddled? NOT AT MX! Nothing wrong with that but that is not MX. A small vibrant, enthusiatic, intellegent, caring, getting to know you community, with excellent academics, unbelievable leadership from all.</p>
<p>Ras,</p>
<p>It did not sound like a smear to me. </p>
<p>"All of the top prep schools consistently produce intelligent, well-educated, successful graduates. "</p>
<p>If that is a smear, what is a compliment?</p>
<p>i think that some people are getting a bit too defensive about smaller schools. it has been well established that there is nothing worse about middlesex, sps, deerfield, etc, when compared to larger schools like andover/exeter. smaller schools don't get all of the "&%&^^%."</p>
<p>prepparent - i believe the point of raspberrysmoothie's post was to not "smear" smaller schools, but to defend larger ones from the unwarranted attacks made by davida. if davida had made a comment about how "anyone knowledgeable about prep schools would choose a/e over sps/mx in a heartbeat," you would try to defend smaller schools as well.</p>
<p>it's been said over and over again (and agreed upon by all) --- size of school is all subjective to the student. some may prefer small schools, some may not. let's not make this a tempest in a teacup.</p>
<p>I really REALLY don't understand why the Ivy Matriculations matter at all. Is U Mich really that bad? Tulane? Vanderbilt? Georgetown? MIT? Middleburry? Like, seriously, it's not all about what Ivy you go to. There's more to life than going to an Ivy. Also, tryign to figure out which one is the best is really stupid. There is a "best" one for every individual. IF you're bad at math, you probs shouldn't come to Exeter because of the way they teach math here, so Andover would be a better choice for you. Etc. There's a college for everyone. There's a prep school for everyone. Chill out guys.</p>
<p>What's wrong with math at exeter?</p>
<p>It's hard to explain. </p>
<p>We don't have text books</p>
<p>We learn from doing problems</p>
<p>We do 8 hard problems a night</p>
<p>You learn methods by doing hard problems. AKA, they don't tell you how to solve it. You figure it out and then you try to find a generalization for that method.</p>
<p>The theory's that by figuring out a math theory/formula on your own before it's defined and formally introduced, you'll remember it better. Kind of like, you'll remember better that sticking your hand in fire hurts than if someone just told you that. It works better for some than others.</p>
<p>Wow. Your teachers had better be darn good if you're getting ALL your theory from them as opposed to being able to supplement the teachings with textbook readings.</p>
<p>I basically taught myself mathematics because I found my math teachers incredibly incompetent at teaching, so I can't imagine not using a textbook.</p>
<p>Is Andover more "traditional" at teaching mathematics, then?</p>
<p>The teachers aren't all superb, but the one's that are good are REALLY good. Jackpot if you end up with one of the people who helped write the "textbook."</p>
<p>Yeah. Math at Exeter is xcore. Andover is more traditional at everything. Some people think Harkness tyle whatever is hard. </p>
<p>Example:</p>
<p>History and Religion: you read the text in the dorm etc and then come to class and discuss it. No lectures. You already know it, you're just discussing what it means and clearing up nebulous ideas and concepts. Some poeple don't like this and prefer the didactive action Andover takes. That's fine.</p>
<p>Math: Explained above</p>
<p>Science: Read text. Do experiment in calss. Read Text about it. Come up with a theory for results. etc</p>
<p>English: Read and just coemto class. lolz</p>
<p>Foreign Language: Just do drills and read at home. Come to class. Discuss. I think this is one of the few where they lecture. This and science, because it's so unclear, etc. and you usually do drills and crap. </p>
<p>but yeah. Those are the major classes.</p>