The difference of high schools

<p>We have two HS very close to each other. Our house is about 3 minutes walk from one but our children attend the other one which is about 4 miles away. </p>

<p>Today, we received the newsletter from the nearby HS. Out of about 100 graduates, they have only one student going to a top 20 school - Vandy. There are several others going to LAC which I am not very familiar. Where as our DD's HS, I think about 20 out of 180 will be attending one of the top 20 universities. </p>

<p>Of course, it is entirely possible that some of the students select local schools over Ivy or other top schools. </p>

<p>I think I have seen some people on the forum asking if the high school makes a difference. The data I have says a very loud and clear "yes".</p>

<p>Get back to us in 30 years, Dad II, with the net worths of the graduates and their scores on a life satisfaction survey, okay?</p>

<p>can't promise that. </p>

<p>As long as there are rankings, there will be people who desire to attend name brand schools. I am merely providing a datapoint to those who care about such information.</p>

<p>I'm in that situation, insofar as my children's high school sends fewer kids to top universities compared to some of the other local high schools. However, thanks to the folks at CC and my own initiative, we'll have enough resources to be able to figure out how to send our kids wherever they want and what best fits -- so what difference does it make if they're the only kids from their high school going to "good" schools or not? It makes ZERO difference when you enter a college campus what the other kids at your high school are doing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Of course, it is entirely possible that some of the students select local schools over Ivy or other top schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course, it's entirely possible that prestige whores send their kids to the high school your daughter attended, and that those who aren't prestige whores don't. </p>

<p>Of course, it's entirely possible that the school that is closest to you is a public school, and the school you sent your daughter to is a private school. (It that the case? If so, then the public school has a different mandate than the private school.)</p>

<p>Of course, it's entirely possible that it's not the high school that matters at all, but instead, the parents of the high schoolers.</p>

<p>And of course, it's entirely possible that the parents don't matter at all, and that the high school should receive all the credit for where a kid goes to college, and the parents shouldn't take any credit 'tall.</p>

<p>I maintain it's the kid, not the HS. A HS can lift up a kid higher than he/she might otherwise be, but a kid who really is capable of getting into a "higher ranked" school can get there no matter what. Many people will seek to send their kids to the former schools, so they will be populated by those seeking a certain kind of college. But like pizzagirl says, so what?</p>

<p>For us, our kids went to a HS much like your closer one. From there, they attended a top ten LAC and an Ivy. If anything, coming from a school which was obviously not a feeder helped them, rather than hindered them. The colleges they were accepted to, it seems, saw what they accomplished as their own, not buoyed up by high octane HS's. And I'm glad of that.</p>

<p>High school does make a difference - how many college counselors they have, how well they market their students all make a difference. It's a catch 22 thing. If a high school is good at placing their students, then better students will want to to go to that high school, then it's easier for the high school to place their students... I have come to believe that college acceptance is all about marketing, it's how students are packaged and how they are perceived by adcom. My daughters' school's counselors visit every single school their kids apply to. They make sure adcoms know about the school's curriculum. Because high school matters, it also effects real estate value of the district it supports, just look at Palo Alto High.</p>

<p>Concur with garland. </p>

<p>My kid went to a high school that up until this year had virtually no track record at top colleges. Nada. This year, there were acceptances to HYP, MIT, Brown, Dartmouth, Cornell, and others – first time any of these schools had appeared on the list of colleges accepting students from this high school. Did something change in the college counseling office this year? Nope. No sudden close relationships developed between the high school and any admissions offices. No marketing, no packaging, no schmoozing. What made the difference this year was the batch of students submitting applications. </p>

<p>Outstanding students have a fair shot at top colleges regardless of the caliber of their high schools. The high school will not be an impediment so long as it gives colleges enough info to see what resources/curriculum are available and how well applicants have taken advantage of available resources.</p>

<p>It doesn't make you a prestige whore just because you want your kids to go to top 20 schools.</p>

<p>The school like the one close to you sounds like our local hs that we send our kids to. The school has AP programs and the teachers to teach them (some better than others). The top kids can be found in those classes. Kids are able to participate in supported ECs, such as band and sports.</p>

<p>But things seem to be slipping in the last 8 years that I've been watching the school. The great theater and choir programs aren't what they once were. The band program is wobbling. My D says that they may not have an AP physics teacher next year. 2 great higher math teachers I know have moved on. The new superintendent has been hired with the mandate to raise school scores, which is a good thing, but means that emphasis/money put on kids who are already doing well or programs to support them are not a high priority.</p>

<p>Things are OK now, but what about 5 years from now?</p>

<p>So even schools that don't send a lot of kids to top ten LACs/Ivies need to have a good AP (or similar) system in place to help along that top student. In that way, what high school you go to can make a difference.</p>

<p>I still maintain that a qualified student doesn't need all the support and extras to get to where they want to be. I think my kids learned more in the real world than in the rarified world of packaging--if they needed that to get into the schools they went to, then they shouldn't have been there in the first place.</p>

<p>JMHO, of course.</p>

<p>And we did not have anything like a "good AP system". But the colleges knew that from the profile, so that's not what they were looking for.</p>

<p>
[quote]
how many college counselors they have, how well they market their students all make a difference.

[/quote]

Oh really? The top students in my class haven't consulted with a college counselor during any time of their high school career, and our school definitely doesn't "market" us favorably, yet many of us are definitely going to desirable colleges. Our valedict is starting as a junior at TAMU and is already doing research at MD Anderson on cancer. Counselors at our school are basically worthless. In addition, zoning in our district prevents people from "selecting" their desired high school.</p>

<p>IMO, I really don't think high school matters all that much. Those who have the potential to make it into top tier schools will make it based on who they are.</p>

<p>Vivi - you are naive in believing that. Why do you think real estate value is much higher around higher ranking schools?</p>

<p>oldfort, if the ONLY reason someone wants his kid to go to a top 20 school is because it's a top 20 school....</p>

<p>And sure, one high school might package a student better than another high school, offer more to challenge a gifted student, etc.</p>

<p>My point was, however, that Dad II's conclusion, his "datapoint," is pretty much meaningless. In comparing where graduates of his two local high schools will matriculate, he drew the conclusion that it was the high school that made the difference. Maybe, but I doubt it.</p>

<p>Agree with owlice. If getting into a top school is important, then by all means, look for the packaging. It may well work.</p>

<p>I maintain that the kid gets into the college, the HS doesn't. Personally, I'm glad I didn't have to question which it was.</p>

<p>that sounds harsh, but that's what posts here are positing.</p>

<p>owlice - I went to Colgate. I think Colgate is very similar to Williams, and I think one probably could get very similar education and experience from either of those schools. If my kid had an opportunity to choose between Colgate or Williams, she would go to Williams - same cost, similar experience, but better ranking. I think most of us would want to send our kids to the best school possible, and it could be the best school for music, engineering, art, international relations, whatever.</p>

<p>I have no horse in this race, but I was just thinking ... If all HS's provide excellent opportunities for college admissions, why does CC exist?</p>

<p>Does anyone think that all High schools provide excellent opportunities for college admissions? I don't think so. I think that students can make their own opportunities, and I think that the beauty of CC is a free, available to everyone aid to doing so!</p>

<p>What if she felt that Colgate was the better fit, oldfort? What if she got into Princeton, but liked Colgate better -- would you insist she go to Princeton because its magazine ranking is higher?</p>

<p>If so, then I have a "PW" tee-shirt to send you!</p>