Looked at the college matriculation lists of a high end (in academic reputation and tuition) private day school and a nearby public school serving a mostly high income area (the schools are in California).
One very noticeable difference between them is that the college destinations from the private school are more heavily skewed toward private colleges (versus in-state public) than the public school. A significant number of students from the public school went to community colleges and CSUs, but hardly any from the private school did, except to CPSLO. From the private school, USC matriculations were more numerous than the two most popular UCs put together, while from the public school, five UCs each had more matriculations than USC.
@doschicos I think it depends on the private school and the how admissions work. Remember…there are boneheads (that’s my nice word!) everywhere…wealth and privilege can’t shield that. My youngest was dating a girl from a very exclusive prep school in the next town. His comment: I have never seen that many kids doing that many drugs ever.
Oh, I definitely agree there are boneheads everywhere and I also agree that access to $$ can mean access to booze/drugs. I’d also say, though, you can party and do bonehead things and still be smart than average. Sometimes I’m astonished by how some people can pull off the partying they do - students or people in the professional world - and still function pretty highly.
One of the obvious differences between the public school my kids went to and the private school they went to before that was that at the private school probably 95% of the kids drank and used some kind of drugs at least periodically, and at the public school, among the academically equivalent kids, very few did, less than 20%. The private school had a great academic reputation, and sent over half its class to Ivies or Ivy-equivalents, or to comparable LACs. The kids who had similar behavior at the public school were the kids who were demographically similar to the kids at the private school – i.e., white, affluent.
Wasn’t it the Andover self survey that showed that at least 50% of the kids who took the survey smoked weed? I may be remembering it wrong, but it was surprising to me.
The results for my wealthy, high achieving district:
In my experience BS kids are kept very, very busy, and while they still drink, smoke and have sex, they have less time and opportunity to do so than similar kids at my public high school.
I’d rather have my kids attend an elite boarding school and then end up at a great (but not elite) college - e.g. NYU, UVA, USC, Holy Cross, Trinity - than public school to Ivy League. With LinkedIn all these millennials list their boarding school now - it sends a powerful signal.
No substitute for the life experience, polish, confidence and instruction received in grades 9-12 at an elite prep. I know a handful of public high school alums who were intimidated, never felt comfortable at their Ivy. The boarding kids I’ve seen attend non-elites sailed at the top of their college class.
That signal of inherited social status may be helpful in some situations, but harmful in other situations where earned achievement is valued more. Granted, inherited social status can sometimes be made to appear like earned achievement (e.g. the public school to elite college student may have come from a super-wealthy family, went to the public school in the wealthiest area, and gotten into the elite college with help from family donations and legacy status), but signaling it blatantly (e.g. boarding school to NYU, BU, or Trinity) may be a negative signal to many.
Many BS kids come from lower or middle class families. The top schools have 40-50% on financial aid. So, attending boarding school is often more about earned achievement than a signal of inherited social status.
@ucbalumnus Elite boarding schools are arguably tougher to get into than elite colleges. I don’t think the signal the send is hollow or pretentious – boarding school grads have a distinct polish, typically type-A communicators, strong writers, wealthy network.
My son attended Exeter and from the time he entered, they beat into us the fact that going to Exeter did not mean it would be easier getting into an Ivy. If anything, admission is far more competitive given the extremely high calibre of students attending schools like Exeter and during his college counselling sessions, they insisted that he include mostly non first-tier institutions showing him (and us) stats of how even the most talented students were being rejected. While Exeter doesn’t calculate class rank, colleges can figure out your relative standing and getting in if you are in the top 25% of your class (as opposed to 10%) is extraordinarily difficult (there are a number of threads about this if you look).
The other thing to bear in mind is that those 20-25% admitted included a large number of recruited athletes. Of the non-hooked students, admit letters are scarce and tend to go to those who make Cum Laude or have something else in their favor. That’s one reason why NYU, Georgetown, and UC Berkeley are increasingly popular.
@momof2g1b I only wish it made a lot of difference when it comes to getting a job or into grad school. Alas, it doesn’t. You can speak with my son and his friends if you’d like. They tell stories of how I-Bank interviewers made rude comments about what went on at your boarding school etc.
@doschicos You also touch on a point that is known to many BS parents: that of the non-recruited athletes, the majority of admits to Ivy and similar universities are FA students or those with special talents. This has been true for several years now. The universities actually recruit these students as they do not want to perpetuate the ‘feeder school’ system. The days when the Heads would identify admits are long gone.
I haven’t read the thread but wondered why the “other private colleges” is separate from “LAC’s.” Do you mean “other private universities?”
Anecdotally, kids at elite boarding schools that I know don’t get into the top colleges at the rate one might expect. Things have changed. I read once (sorry can’t cite) that a Harvard admissions person claimed given two candidates with equal stats and accomplishments, one from a private boarding school and one from a (mediocre?) public, that Harvard would take the latter, the idea being that the public school student would benefit more from the opportunity.
I can assure you that where I live in Southern CA, public HSs are generally considered to be tougher or more competitive than the privates. But one or two good privates emphasize arts or music.
momof2g1b wrote:
I’d rather have my kids attend an elite boarding school and then end up at a great (but not elite) college - e.g. NYU, UVA, USC, Holy Cross, Trinity - than public school to Ivy League. With LinkedIn all these millennials list their boarding school now - it sends a powerful signal.
Powerful signal of what and to whom?
The sorority women at a wide range of “non elite” colleges also list their sorority. Kids from Stuy and TJ put THAT in their Linkedin profile. Former winners of Chopin competition, Miss Zucchini Festival, Siemens, Physics Olympiad, National Lincoln-Douglas debate competition, various beauty pageants, random “book awards” from HS.
Some of these “signals” have actual achievement attached to them. Some signal extreme luck in the genetic lottery. Some both and some neither (is a company really going to hire a 30 year old just because he won the XYZ Book award at the age of 17? I think not).
I wouldn’t take the Linkedin profiles of a bunch of 24 year olds as a fact pattern. By the time someone is 28 or 29, there ought to be a ton of actual accomplishment taking the place of the decade old attendance at a posh HS.
And I keep waiting for a parent to concede- even on an anonymous message board- the existence of an entire group of non-academic, low standard, expensive private schools (both boarding and day) which were created in direct response to school desegregation in the 1960’s in parts of the country. These are the not the 19th century institutions educating a new country’s elite. These are modern schools whose history is one of "as long as I can afford it, my kid isn’t going to class with “fill in the blank” riff raff. Some of these places are- in fact- somewhat desegregated by now, at least with a few wealthy kids from China and India. But I’d love to see an analysis of where THOSE kids end up attending college.
My S, coming from an extremely non-elite public school, was not intimidated by these “polished, confident” rich kids at his Ivy. He was, though, disgusted by their arrogance, entitlement, and pursuit of money over actual, you know, knowledge, that was obiquitous.
Just thought I’d add that as long as we’re over-generalizing about people.
