<p>yes, i meant college counselors... advisers are like mentors, correct? i meant college counselors.</p>
<p>there was a blog i found a while ago, written by an exeter student in the middle of applying to college. he wrote one scathing article about how unfair new uppers and their college admissions were. he said it wasn't fair that they had to "go through" prep and lower year and that they could just pop in and steal the spots at the top colleges. </p>
<p>it was actually pretty informative.. i found it by searching in the image section of google... they had a chart comparing new upper/ 4 year students success in college (he actually listed the names of all kids accepted into the ivies and put a asterisk next to those who were new uppers).... i think that's against the rules? to make all of that info known?</p>
<p>Blair, if you end up finding it again you should post it here. It seems really interesting.</p>
<p>percentage of exeter seniors who receive a 10-11 mark (on an 11 scale)</p>
<p>4year= 18/175 =10%
3year= 11/78 = 14%
2year= 10/42 = 24% (this includes the recruited athletes)</p>
<p>Below 7.0
4y= 8/175 = 5%
3y= 7/78 = 9%
2y= 1/42 = 2%</p>
<p>Well, blairt, the numbers set the bar pretty high for you.</p>
<p>I'd look at these statistics -- the ones you've spelled out and those that you recall -- as more of a high standard of achievement that will be expected of you as a new Upper instead of a FastPass to higher grades and better colleges.</p>
<p>I wouldn't spend time basking in the stellar performance of those who preceded me because, as we all know: YMMV. I've seen plenty of people assume that they will advance to "Go" on the sheer weight of historical data, only to learn too late that the people who are behind those numbers didn't rely on them. They actually had to achieve with no comfort in past performance of others. They differentiated themselves from their predecessors by failing to play by the same rules and relying on an illusion of some guaranteed success that their predecessors didn't rely on.</p>
<p>Other people's pasts are not your future. Find a grain of salt now.</p>
<p>I never once suggested that new uppers were "superior". I suggested -- in my first post and the following posts -- that we seemed just the opposite. The title of this thread is a question, not a proclamation. I was confused at how messed up 11th grade admissions seems to be. It's tough to get in, but we seem average in terms of achievement. We're 2 years behind, but we do better in terms of GPA's. We have many disadvantages, and some advantages (which are overpowered by the many disadvantages, in my opinion). That is why it is confusing. Hence the "WHAT IS IT" and the "?". I was pretty sure that was made clear.</p>
<p>You've made the case that new Uppers fare better than the rest of the pack. You've made that clear. I'm just pointing out that you'd do well to not be so amazed by the data or get drawn into thinking that there's anything here for you to sort out because the only new Upper stats that matter to you will be the ones you create.</p>
<p>i'm just confused. better gpa's, fewer preparation, seemingly less impressive stats than those with 2 extra years of prep. but, as a whole, they're supposed to do better in college admissions. i was curious to know if anyone had an explanation.. the data seems screwed up.</p>
<p>
[quote]
i'm just confused. better gpa's, fewer preparation, seemingly less impressive stats than those with 2 extra years of prep. but, as a whole, they're supposed to do better in college admissions. i was curious to know if anyone had an explanation.. the data seems screwed up.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think it's the data that's screwed up... ;)</p>
<p>It'd be interesting to know how many of the admitted 11th graders were star athletes. I've heard the theory that athletes show their true abilities after adolescence, which for boys would hit around 11th grade. Stories of kids who were not standouts, suddenly hitting their adult height, and coordination, during the later years of high school.</p>
<p>If you could factor out the superlative athletes of the bunch, the remaining 11th grade admissions might not look so stellar in college admissions.</p>
<p>If the group were full of recruited athletes (from the 20 I know of, not one is a recruited athlete.. but there could be some), and not just academically bright kids, then the GPA would probably decrease (simply because you can only focus so hard on so many categories, academics or athletics), not increase. So that seems unlikely. The recruited athletes seem to be the 1 year kids. .. From what I've seen. Everyone says that new uppers are mostly academic kids.</p>
<p>I wonder what percent of the upper admits came from the "does not need FA" pile? Exeter is one of the schools that is not need blind when it come to making admissions decisions.</p>
<p>I emailed one of the admissions people at Exeter and she said the average acceptance rate is around 22% - the same for all grades. Andover said the same thing while I was at Summer Session.</p>
<p>blairt- please check in with us when you get your first dose of humility.</p>
<p>MOWC-don't hold your breath! :)</p>
<p>Good lord; just when I thought she could not get more annoying. The more cynical I get, I just can't keep up.</p>