I mentioned this in my post above (#93), among others… One possible indirect advantage of prep schools is better teaching and/or more test focused teaching, which could be reflected in a higher SAT score. However, this type of possible indirect influence on SAT score isn’t the type prep school special elite college admissions advantage/hook claim that some posters have made in this thread.
Better teaching is also not the primary reason why students at selective high schools have high average SAT scores – it’s that selective high schools select entering students based on a combination metrics that are well correlated with SAT score, often including SSAT, SHSAT, or similar SAT-like standardized test score. The admission criteria is also often well correlated with the admission criteria selective private colleges use, often more so than SSAT/SHSAT score alone. As such, this high school admissions selectivity is a key reason why such selective high schools often have a larger number of selective college acceptances than non-selective HSs.
Regardless, comparing acceptance results among applicants with similar test scores at different high schools is more meaningful than comparing total number of acceptances at different HSs in isolation, without considering differences in the number of highly qualified applicants.
This a very selective, and misleading reading of the paper. In their model 3, students from elite 72 schools are 35% more likely to be admitted, after controlling for other variables. In their model 4, students from elite 72 schools were 11% more likely to be admitted. In their model 4, students from private schools were 40% more likely to be admitted.
Another advantage that elite prep schools give with standardized tests is letting students know early in planning to take them (with time for any desired test prep), allowing for retries and subject tests. In contrast, students at non elite schools may take their first SAT or ACT in fall of senior year, and may not realize that subject tests exist until then.
The author’s quote from my post is a direct quote from the abstract of the paper, which is repeated below. His claim was not that elite 72 high schools have a disadvantage or that private school students have a disadvantage.
In fairness, when I wrote my earlier post, I had only read the abstract, as the rest of the paper was not free. Searching in more detail for a copy of the full paper, I see that the author uses the “elite 72” designation to separate high school “prestige” from student quality metrics of the high school. Elite 72 are the 72 high schools that surveyed admission officers at an Ivy League college (probably Princeton) thought were the “top US secondary schools”.
The model 3 you referenced does not control for either student or high school quality metrics, such as the individual applicants’ stats. I expect “elite 72” high schools are often selective and often have a higher concentration of stellar high stat students, so it’s not surprising that they have a higher rate of admission when you do not control for SAT score or other metrics of student quality.
The more interesting case is model 4, which controls for both individual student SAT score and # of AP exams, as well as the averages for the high school. It found that students at “elite 72” prestigious high schools designation had a slightly (statistically significant at 5% level, but not at 1% level) higher rate of admission to elite colleges than other students with similar SAT/AP/… controls who attended HSs with similar quality students as measured by average SAT/AP, but did not have this prestigious “elite 72” HS designation.
It’s also relevant to note that the models are missing some key controls and only explain ~20% of variance in college admission decisions. The other 80% of variance in admission decisions depends other factors besides the listed stats, HS variables, gender, race, etc. There is also an issue with “clustering” of applications at particular HSs. The author notes that 40% of the included HSs had only 1 application to the elite colleges and most had <=2 applications, while a small minority of HSs had large numbers of applications, as high as 287 applications from one HS.
Just registering my frustration that these discussions so often turn to studies, modeling, SAT/AP scores, etc. “Missing some key controls?”
Or perceived privileges.
You app isn’t admitted based on just superficials. Or the fact your parents could afford away sports camp. This is no one-look process, the content of your app matters. Not just Black, elite prep, stats, prep type sports, or some other combo.
You don’t need to explain to me. Just be aware how often the convo turns this way. It’s interesting. But how germane is it, to those actually applying?
Lindagaf said, “…help a kid to understand better all the factors beyond their control.” Ok. But it’s become, imo, an assertion of what does the trick. As if. Some profiles may contribute. It’s not enough.
Carry on, if you wish. No response needed for me. Unbookmarking.
Did I already say in this thread that there are lies, _____ lies, and statistics? I’ll say it now, lol. Statistics aren’t going to convince a lot of people that kids from prep schools don’t have an advantage over kids from regular non-top performing high schools.
At the end of the day, if you don’t have what the college is looking for, be it a factor on the CDS, their institutional needs, or demonstrating fit, you’re unlikely to get if in if you’re deferred or waitlisted. Put your energy into finding a college that offers a realistic chance of getting in.
“Put your energy into finding a college that offers a realistic chance of getting in.”
This can’t be stated enough. And lookingforward, while we all agree with you (the statistics aren’t determinative of an individual kid’s chances of getting in), most people wildly overestimate how distinctive/special/etc. they and their kids are. There are SO many kids who are posting that their essays are “10 out of 10” because their HS English teacher read it and observed that there are no obvious grammatical or spelling issues. As if having an essay which uses nouns and verbs correctly makes it outstanding.
The stats aren’t going to predict what will happen to YOUR kid. But the stats ARE going to explain why being “Boho” won’t get your kid into Brown, or why being a musical theater loving kid won’t get your kid into NYU or CMU, or why loving computer games or robotics won’t get your kid into MIT. AND why having started a cyber tech company at age 17 won’t get you into Stanford.
The answers to those questions ARE the stats. Just too many darn kids just as special and just as Boho and just as magnificent as your kid- and many of them ALSO have stronger academic records or higher SAT scores or spent part of their childhood in a homeless shelter.
It is hard to live in Winnetka or Atherton or Belmont or any other affluent suburb (whether it’s in Minnesota or Massachusetts- but worse in MA) and recognize the breadth and depth of the talent pool. Being Val is so fantastic- except there are thousands upon thousands of Val’s. That’s where some understanding of how statistics work is really helpful in tempering expectations.
And why Linda is today’s winner. Put your energy into finding a college that offers a realistic chance of getting in. You want to apply to MIT? Go for it. But take a look at some of the programs at Case, RPI, WPI and see what makes them special. You love Amherst? So do I! But I could give you dozens of reasons to fall in love with Bates and Carleton and Earlham and Conn College and Skidmore and Hamilton.
I’m seeing disappointed families now IRL and while some of the results are truly headscratchers, most of them are pretty predictable. Kid looked at the alleged “early advantage” and threw in an application to a college where they didn’t have a snowball’s chance of getting in. And now kid is facing a bleak week of grinding out applications to the “sloppy seconds”, plus the hated safety school. I try to cheer them up by talking about the smartest statistician I ever hired who came from Rutgers, or the top speechwriter I know who earns huge bucks ghost writing for corporate CEO’s who has a degree in English from Holy Cross. And of course- all the talented performers in every Playbill who graduated from colleges you never knew had a performing arts program…
Kudos to lindagraf and blossom! As a top AO explained recently, ED is like medicine for the sick, but it can not resuscitate the dead. The nationwide applicant pool is fiercely competitive, and there are far more national and state level awardees than most kids realize. Fortunately, there are lots of great colleges where kids will thrive.
This thread has my head spinning. Part of the problem is “statistics” vs “anecdotes”. D20 is a typical average excellent, white, suburban Upstate NY, average HS, FA need kid. Basic college research as a sophomore led her down the path of SLACs. Private tutor was pushing Brown and Dartmouth, which D ruled out as size was too big. HS sends tons to state schools and very little else. She felt she was on this journey alone, and we hired a private admissions consultant to help us. D hated state school vibes and didn’t apply to a single one, which was contrary to most advice since we have some 529 savings but nowhere near $300K. We were told we were taking a pretty big gamble, that “meets 100% need” schools were too reachy. Bottom line, D was accepted ED to the first school she toured (not 15% admit rate but low 20’s) with a grant that leaves us with a lower payment than our EFC, and they are need aware. The stats were against us all through the whole process. The anecdote is a head scratcher. Holistic review? HS no one has attended from? ED app? Or was it D as a sophomore approaching the Dean of Admissions and introducing herself, asking thoughtful questions, following up with an email, repeating those steps again as a junior, and sending an email when her app was submitted (which elicited a response that said they couldn’t wait to read it)? Who knows…
Bottom line: we are very fortunate, we know it, and we are tremendously grateful!
I personally don’t know anyone who has won Publisher’s Clearinghouse, or won anything more than $100 in their state’s lottery, but I know it happens. There are documented cases of a guy leaving his fast food job, buying a Powerball ticket, and becoming a gazillionaire overnight.
Nevertheless- would you actually tell people who earn $14 an hour that buying lottery tickets is a good use of their funds? No you would not. You’d be talking about how paying down a credit card debt is the most efficient way to spend any spare cash. You’d be talking about renegotiating a cellphone plan so he wasn’t spending hundreds of dollars a year on bells and whistles he doesn’t need.
That’s what we’re talking about here. The thousands of kids who think “it can happen to me” so they click send on the Stanford application without taking the time to do the “boring” (paying off your credit card debt with every spare dime) work of discovering that Missouri M&T has a fantastic engineering program (cheaper than Stanford!) or that Bentley has a terrific program in entrepreneurship, or that Stonybrook has phenomenal faculty in virtually every STEM discipline. Sure, buy a lottery ticket if you can afford it. But you don’t quit your day job and sit at home waiting for your number to be called.
helpingmom40’s daughter got in ED to a school with an acceptance rate in the low 20’s. That’s a great achievement, but completely different than trying to get into Stanford (or the like) without a hook.
Fortunately college admissions is not a random lottery and is all about the individual applicant and how they match up (or not) with the institutional needs and culture of a particular college. My first thread ever on CC was exactly to this point.
The odds of winning the Powerball lottery is like 170 million to one. The odds of getting accepted to a 10% acceptance rate college is 1 in 10 plus its holistic and not at all random.
I have no problem with some kids having a “dream” school or very “reach” college(s) as long as they can afford it, you as parents manage their expectations that it’s not likely they will get in, and you have a good mix of safety and match colleges.
My best friend growing up, had always wanted, since middle school, to study Engineering at UC Berkeley and this goal motivated him to study hard and challenge himself with summer internships (Hewlett-Packard), founding computer science clubs in HS, etc. And as you can probably guess he was accepted to UCB.
There was nothing random (lottery) about his acceptance to UCB in Engineering, he had a reach goal and did the things needed to make himself a very competitive applicant. I give him a lot of credit for his “success” and even if he didn’t get accepted to his “dream” college, it motivated him to excel in HS; traits that would have carried with him no matter where he ended up.
“The odds of getting accepted to a 10% acceptance rate college is 1 in 10"
While I agree that the “powerball” analogy overstates how difficult it is to get into highly competitive schools, for an unhooked kid, particularly one from an over-represented region, the odds of getting accepted to a 10% acceptance rate college are much worse than 1 in 10. Half or more of the acceptance slots have been allocated to other groups before they even get to your app. This is the point that OP made at the outset of this thread.
@bigchef Odds for lots of kids are lower than avg, but for applicants with very high test scores the odds are actually higher. I have seen some schools, (Hamilton, Amherst, Brown come to mind), where they break out admit rates by score. Kids scoring 34+ or 750+ per SAT section, have a much higher admit rate than the average rate.
Agreed, @sue22. So while those with a 4.0 GPA have a higher admit rate to Princeton than lower GPA students, for example, 92% of such 4.0 applicants are still rejected.
If you don’t consider statistics, analyses, or studies; then it becomes a matter of faith in beliefs, without meaningful evidence, often emphasizing anecdotal examples. For example, reasoning like my friend’s 2nd cousin went to a top prep school and got it to an Ivy, while my kid who didn’t attend the prep didn’t get in to any Ivy. Therefore attending prep schools is a big hook in elite college admissions. As stated in many posts, my position is not all kids from prep schools do or do not have at advantage. As quoted from post #53, it is:
Certain individual HSs and types of HSs are tremendously overrepresented among students at HYPSM... selective private colleges. I believe the two primary reasons for this overrepresentation are students attending those types of high schools are tremendously more likely to apply than the general population; and those high schools are often selective in a criteria that correlates well with the criteria colleges in admission, leading to a high concentration of students with criteria that Ivies value (including hooks).
Whether a particular student would have better or worse chance of college admission at a different HS depends on the particular student. I wouldn't assume that attending a HS that sends a good number of students to HYPSM... means an individual applicant's chance of being accepted shoots up, nor would I assume it means an individual applicant's chance of admission shoots down.