<p>When I was applying to colleges (about 1 million years ago), in general, the best colleges recruited from the best private high schools. I'm not sure if they didn't seek out public school kids or whether those kids didn't think to apply. But it just wasn't a funnel.</p>
<p>is that the case today among elite colleges? (I realize i'm generalizing). Say 2 students graduated with about the same GPA, SAT, and similar ECs to a top 20 school. Would the private school kid have a leg up over a public school kid or vica versa?</p>
<p>Our HS participates in a college fair every year that brings in the better schools to our area - the four sponsoring institutions are the two public HS from the wealthiest areas and the two private HS that most of the wealthy kids go to. All four routinely place kids in all the top schools, including multiples from each school into HYPSM. Not every kid in the metropolitan area who gets into those schools goes to one of the four, but they are the considerable majority. If you get in but don’t go to one of the four, you likely go to one of the other top income tier public or privates.</p>
<p>is that the case today among elite colleges? (I realize i’m generalizing). Say 2 students graduated with about the same GPA, SAT, and similar ECs to a top 20 school. Would the private school kid have a leg up over a public school kid or vica versa?</p>
<p>Neither - I really don’t think it matters. As someone said earlier, private schools tend to be overrepresented at elite colleges because wealthy parents tend to be more likely to be alumni of these elite colleges, and tend to be more able to afford to send their kids there - but public schools in wealthy areas tend to be well-represented too.</p>
<p>MrMom, what sparked the question is that my kids are in a urban public school right now and a private school mom said to me, “your kids are going to have a much easier time getting into a competitive school than a private school kid would…because they’ll stand out” and I wondered if what she said was spot-on…that said, there’s another thread going on right now here at CC on how recruiters overwhelmingly visit private schools vs. public so it could be simply the opportunity.</p>
<p>“competitive” school admissions know how to weed out high performers in good schools or mediocre schools. The other mom’s theory of “big fish in a little pond” is rife with poor assumptions.</p>
<p>An otherwise high potential student, in a non-challenging environment, yet becomes the valedictorian, certainly may graduate with less skills than her twin scholar who goes to a school with many resources, a super-challenging atmosphere yet is “only” in the top 5%.</p>
<p>SouthernHope: Okay, there is that theory, Big Fish in Little Pond, but I’m not sure how that really plays out. I have heard of people seeking out smaller private schools, so they aren’t crowded out of a more competitive school, sort of a hidden quota per HS for the top schools. But I can tell you I know of a kid who had a 36 ACT at a middle class public who got denied like everyone else at Stanford, probably somewhat due to the fact that his school doesn’t have the course offerings of the top publics.</p>
<p>I think it’s a fool’s errand to seek out a lesser school for your kids under the assumption that they’ll somehow stand out. If you’re stuck with that school, fine, you deal with it, but to intentionally go with a lesser school so that somehow you look better - how would you even know that the college you’re after will even look at something like that. If you’re a URM going to a truly horrible public, low income family, and happen to get a 32+ ACT, sure, they’ll cut you a break, but your average white kid is going to lose more than they are going to gain by seeking out a lesser school. (Sounds a little like that parent is rationalizing her kid’s potential failure and your kid’s potential success - everyone thinks everyone else has some advantage and they have none, when she’s probably got a gazillion advantages over you.)</p>
<p>I compare this to parents who redshirt their kindergarteners and have them play smaller kids, under the mistaken belief that this will somehow advance their athletic careers because they are now “winners”. The key to being a winning athlete is beating the older, stronger kids, not the younger, weaker ones. You are fooling no one, except yourself, if you think that being #1 in both situations is the same thing.</p>
<p>Admissions Counselors are familiar with the Schools in an area. Recruiting and admitting are not the same thing. With those two assumptions: Colleges recruit at private schools because Private school families tend to contribute. Colleges need contributions. When it comes to admitting students, the counselors will see the high school as part of the student profile. This can mean that the counselor says “Wow! this kid did great at a lesser school. Imagine what he /she would do at our greart college” or the counselor may look and say “ugh, I have never been impressed by any kid from that school.”</p>
<p>I suggest that you focus on individual talents so that your student has something to offer that is unique, or at least special. Then the counselor will say “who cares where this kid goes to school? we gotta have 'em”</p>
<p>I have to say, I think private school kids get a boost.</p>
<p>I attend a public HS in an affluent area and every year there are a bunch of really qualified kids who don’t get into the tippy-top schools. Sure, we still send around twenty or so per year, but compared to the admissions results of the nearby prep school where several of my friends go, I think I’d have to give the upper hand to the latter. It’s just a lot easier to be team captain, club president, and student council member when the graduating class is 50 kids than when it’s 500 (or more). And having these leadership roles does make a difference. </p>
<p>Furthermore, I think that private/prep schools just see better admissions rates for their kids, period. Especially the New England boarding schools, geez, lol. So at a public, even a top 100, you’d have to really stand out in order to even compete with the kids from the nearby private schools who may be applying. My friends from said prep school were going over ED/EA decisions for students from their school and I was a little bit surprised to hear that people with 2100’s/3.8’s got into the likes of Duke, Chicago, etc. when a person with those stats from my HS would’ve just been flat-out rejected (and were, this admissions cycle). </p>
<p>This is just my opinion though. Personally, I attended a private school from K-8 and hated it. I really enjoy being in a public school and I think that if you live in an area where the schools are highly rated, then I say save the money and just attend the public. There are still plenty of kids who get into Ivies from a public school, and just as many from private schools (whose parents have shelled out a TON of money) who end up going to the state flagship. One shouldn’t base the decision of where their kids go for the next four years on how the likelihood of getting into a top school–at the highest levels it’s still ultimately a crapshoot.</p>
<p>What you don’t know is what the complete admissions package of the private school kids looks like. Were they legacies, did they have harder classes, athletes, ECs, etc.? There are always kids with seemingly weak stats that get in - there’s always some other factor that is not apparent, it’s not just the school they go to.</p>
<p>OP asked whether a private school kid gets a boost in admissions over a public assuming same GPA, SAT and EC’s. I’m not sure there’s any boost at that point, but the boost comes in the process of getting to that point. My D goes to a reasonably good public school in an affluent area. Still, she has barely met her GC. Due to budget cuts, her GC only works 3 days a week at the HS (and works 2 days a week at the local middle school). The GC’s are very overloaded and have to spend their time sorting out schedules, dealing with kids facing suspension, etc. There’s very little time left to spend with the kids who are otherwise thriving, especially the freshman and sophomores. </p>
<p>What’s really lacking at our public school, IMHO, is an effort to identify potential high achievers early on in their freshman or even sophomore year. In fact, the party line at D’s school is to discourage kids from taking more than one honors class. Some of the GC’s, while well intentioned, give out incorrect info, such as casually telling the kids that the PSAT is just a “practice” SAT and not adequately explaining its importance for National Merit. This happened last September in my D’s APUSH class, which was the exact class where the GC’s should’ve been emphasizing the PSAT. No surprise then that the small, private parochial school nearby had 26 NMSF’s last year while D’s large public had 11.</p>
<p>Corinthian - At many, if not most, public high schools, it is politically unacceptable to focus on high achieving kids unless you can round up a group of parents to demand that it be done. By their very nature, most GCs are more focused more on underachievers or just getting kids to apply to college, never mind the hoops that they have to go through to get a select group of kids into top colleges.</p>
<p>Here’s my advice - you need to become the squeaky wheel, because squeaky wheels get the attention. This may not necessarily benefit your child, if they’re close to graduation, but it will benefit everyone who comes after. Your school has 11 NMSF - that’s no small feat in any school. It means there’s a large number of high performing kids in your school. It will also mean there’s a large number just below them, who didn’t qualify to be NMSF, but who will qualify to go to high powered schools. There is probably at least 100 kids a year who have a shot at top colleges, plus the usual crew who need someone to find them a good college, even the state flagship, to go to. Someone who knows the in’s and out’s of the system, who will tell them what courses to take, what colleges to apply to, what tests to take, etc. In short, you need a college advisor - not a GC. GCs perform one function, CA’s another, and they are not the same thing.</p>
<p>You need to round up a posse of interested parents and pressure the school board for one slot to be that college advisor. Someone who’s done the job before, not a GC. It takes a remarkably small group of parents to get this done, I know the drill, and I’ve put pressure on a school board for something much bigger. Write a position paper about why the school needs this, circulate it, use Facebook to create an interest group. Make sure that everyone knows it’s a completely different job that will benefit every college bound kid at the HS, and will increase the quality of college everyone goes to, increasing the prestige of the district, which in turn increases property values. (Everyone likes that one, make it about it being a positive investment, not an expense.) If your district starts getting large numbers of kids into Top 25 National Universities and LACs, people will start to notice and will want to move into the district. Getting into those schools is no accident, make sure you have an expert who knows how it’s done.</p>