<p>Private high schools vs. public high schools:</p>
<p>Does sending your son or daughter to a private school increase his or her chances at admission to the Ivy League?</p>
<p>I came across an interesting comment today that attending private schools increase your chances because private school counselors "package" you for certain schools once you tell them which ones you are aiming for. The person went on to say that colleges look to pick students from private schools, aside from the fact that they tend to be better, but also because they are more likely to pay the full tuition.</p>
<p>What's your opinion? Is one better than the other? Are they equal?</p>
<p>PS: This thread probably seems out of place in the Harvard thread, but I was thinking that the advantage (if any) would probably be most obvious at the very top and I trust your opinions the most!</p>
<p>I suppose the difference in quality between the two types of schools might differ from location to location. Where I’m at, the private schools often send kids to the best colleges. So do the public schools although they are not known to spoonfeed the ivy league schools. Anyway, this is why I believe them to be equal:</p>
<p>Parents sending their children to private schools will be more wealthy than those sending their children to public schools. Correlating their wealth with education, we can assume that they went to top schools themselves. Legacy & education-oriented.</p>
<p>Also, wealthy parents - not entirely the private schools themseleves - will provide their children with the most resources.</p>
<p>I have friends from both public and private schools, and the top students in both tend to be around the same level. [The reason I’m interested is because the person who said the comment I described earlier upset a lot of public-school parents. He boasted about sending his children to top schools (in art, music, etc.) despite their ~1650 SAT scores. It irritated me, but I wanted to see if his hypothesis had any merit.]</p>
<p>Apart from certain “feeder schools,” I would say generally no. Admission at most top colleges reflects how well you took advantage of the resources available to you. So, even if we make the assumption that private schools have more resources than public schools (which is often not the case at all), it doesn’t really make a difference. There is more to be said for how well public vs. private schools prepare you for college, specifically the workload. A lot of smart kids here at Harvard have additional challenges because they came from a crappy school.</p>
<p>Schools like Phillips-Exeter/Andover may be exceptions, but as a caveat, you really need to rank high there to have any sort of advantage in top Ivies. Graduating at the middle to bottom of your class there may very well disadvantage you.</p>
<p>I generally agree with Dwight, but here’s what I’ve learned recently…</p>
<p>Private school guidance counselors and teachers write better recommendations. They also KNOW the regional admissions officers and can call them up and ask, “Hey, why is my student waitlisted?” etc. They push and squeaky wheel and can make the difference in borderline cases.</p>
<p>Bottom line: The teachers and GCs at private schools are paid more to give a *****.</p>
<p>signed,
mother of a public school student.</p>
<p>P.S. I would not exchange the public school education and socialization for private for anything. Except maybe acceptance to Harvard. :)</p>
<p>One reason private guidance counselors and teachers might write better recommendations is that they know the students better- they have fewer of them.
I’m not sure that the teachers at privates schools are paid more, though. At least not in my area.</p>
<p>Private schools tend to have more focus on college. When you register, they make sure you are taking the right classes for you. In some publc schools they don’t pay as much attention to your college plans.</p>
<p>I suppose that guidance counselors and students know their teachers better at private schools, like moonchild mentioned, but since we’re talking specifically at the top schools I think that aspiring top notch students would receive just as much attention at a public as in a private school. (And should the private school be Phillips-Exeter or Andover as DwightEisenhower mentioned where you have to be TOP-notch, I would think that many talented students would probably be better off at a public school, right?)</p>
<p>It really depends on which public or private your talking about. </p>
<p>From my experience going to a small private school, it’s just really hard to compare. Richard Shaw, the Stanford dean of admissions told my school when asked private vs. public high school( which is easier to get into Stanford) he responded " it really doesn’t matter, you are competing against your own classmates more than the school across town"</p>
<p>The public schools around my school are really bad, an example would be my friend who was #2 at a local high school with over 800 seniors. She transfers to my private school during senior year because her public school can’t offer her any more classes to challenge her. Lo and behold she’s getting all Cs, and B-s at my private school. Yes, your grades will be higher at a bad public school. </p>
<p>But like I said earlier, it all depends on the school. There are some really competitive public schools that have better teachers and resources than many private. There are also a ton of privates that grade inflate every student’s GPA. </p>
<p>In response to the discussion about LORS, I have to say that teachers at privates do know their students better because of a smaller class. Especially the GC who only has to handle 50 or so kids while, the public GC has to write 800+ LORS. There’s a huge difference in the specificity and quality.</p>
<p>Then again, public school teachers are more likely to respond with “greatest student in the past 20 years” because the overall quality of the students may not be as good as in private schools where it can be much harder academically. Then again. this is a generalization ( many students at publics may be better than privates).</p>
<p>Depends on the school, of course. It’s presumed one gets a “better” education at an elite private college than a big, state (public) university. Same goes for high schools. My niece was once told that the “A” she earns at her public high school is not the same as an “A” earned at our local (FABULOUS) private school. Now…she MIGHT have still made that “A” if she went to the private, but no one will ever know. They have to go by their history. If they’ve taken a lot of kids from High School A (public OR private), and those kids are successful (and they DO track that)…then they’re apt to go back to the well again. VERY generally, there are SO many reasons why some private schools are better. My D started in a private school, but it was a tiny little bit of nothing with no opportunity. Conversely, we have a private nearby that is #1 in the state in nearly everything academic. Every child graduates, every child goes to college (and, yes…I mean 100%…and it’s not that small either). Tops in every standardized testing. You can’t argue with those stats. They have wonderful arts and athletics. They can afford the best teachers, equipment, extra hours. The kids have money so they can participate in after school activities, they had computers in their homes before many of us had them in our offices, they have support and homework help. The school has lecturers, buys the best new text books, etc etc. Compare that to the other end of the spectrum, a school with 40 in the graduating class, no APs offered, … I won’t go on, you get it. Colleges know the valedictorian from the first school has rigorous courses, good grades, ranked top, and is prepared for college. Valedictorian from the other school MIGHT place 30th at the private school. There is not much way of knowing (though standardized test scores can help paint a picture). But colleges play their odds.</p>
<p>If someone has statistics comparing the acceptance rates of private school students versus public school students at any of the top institutions, it could provide an imperfect generalized measure of which group has the greater advantage as a collective whole.</p>