<p>JHS: Exeter was ranked #11 when examing its actual college placement for the years of 2006, 2005 & 2004. All U.S. based college matriculations were rated for this ranking. Exeter's weakness is it's placement outside of the top third of each class. This info. was supplied by Exeter. Andover, on the other hand, has outstanding college placement for almost it's entire graduating class. And, I was particularly sensitive regarding Exeter in this study. Exeter folks with whom I spoke were friendly, gracious and helpful when dealing with my project. But no, Exeter did not even make the top ten "northeastern" U.S. boarding schools for college placement success. I will gladly furnish you with my findings if you PM me. As hard as it is to believe, my results are accurate-- much more accurate than any other study of which I and many "in the industry" are aware. You will also receive the methodology which will enable you to verify my findings.</p>
<p>I suppose it depends on what colleges you pick. But if you use the 8 Ivy Leagues plus Stanford and MIT then the results are a bit different. They could have used the Prepreview.com 2008 list. This list also shows average SAT scores (with some not incl the new format):
1 St. Paul's School 34% 2049
2 Deerfield Academy 32% 2040
2 Milton Academy 32% 1360
4 Groton School 31% 2100
5 Middlesex School 30% 2010
6 Phillips Andover Academy 29% 2008
6 Phillips Exeter Academy 29% 2073
8 Noble and Greenough School 28% 1355
9 St. Albans School DC 25%
10 Lawrenceville School 22% 2020
11 Hotchkiss School 20% 2015
12 Choate Rosemary Hall 19% 1332
13 Hockaday School 18% 1990
14 Peddie School 17%
15 St. Andrew's School 16% 1305
15 Belmont Hill School 16% 1340
17 Blair Academy 12% 1230
17 Taft School 12% 1293
19 St. George's School 11% 1291
19 Indian Springs School 11% 1305
21 Cate School 10% 1310
21 Concord Academy 10% 2023
23 Cranbrook Schools 8-10% 1921
23 Georgetown Preparatory School 8-10%
23 Loomis Chaffee School 8-10%
23 Northfield Mount Hermon School 8-10% 1202
23 Miss Porter's School 8-10% 1865
23 Emma Willard School 8-10% 1910
23 Episcopal High School 8-10%
30 Kent School 5-8%
30 Webb Schools 5-8% 1300
30 Woodberry Forest School 5-8% 1310
30 Culver Academies 5-8%en the raking is a bit different.</p>
<p>Scottfossel, can you get us the info for private day schools as well? This is just for boarding schools, it seems.</p>
<p>Sorry, you can but you need to subscribe.</p>
<p>The problem is what to make of the data. It does not mean that a randomly selected student would be more likely to be admitted to these colleges if he attends one of these high schools than if he attends his local public school. It needs to be remembered that these high schools select students with an eye toward their ability to get accepted at prestigious colleges. For example, students whose parents are legacies at Ivy's will get the nod over those who are not. Those who are likely to contribute substantially to the high school and future colleges will get the nod over those who cannot.</p>
<p>I found the data from the last time the wsj did this survey (2003). Here's the link. The schools are fairly comparable to this year's. Unfortunately, it does not list the ten schools on this webpage.</p>
<p>The ten schools that year were Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Chicago, and Pomona. The original concept was Ivies plus Stanford, Duke, and Chicago, but Columbia and Stanford refused to cooperate. Pomona was inserted as the nearest West Coast equivalent to Stanford in terms of selectivity, and they decided that no proxy was necessary for Columbia. They also claimed to have looked at the effect of adding Williams, Amherst, and Swarthmore, and decided that it didn't make enough of a difference.</p>
<p>I thought to go to Ivies and top schools you really had to be in the top 10% of one's class. So how do some of these highschools send such huge percentages to them?</p>
<p>If you read the footnotes on the statistics for the percentage of students in the top 10% you will see that it is as a percentage of those reporting class rank. I would guess that none of the schools listed officially reports class rank and as a result most of their students are not counted in this calculation. I think only something like 60% of high school students have an officially reported class rank. That's why you often see this data with a footnote that says it's based on less than 50% of the student body. Most competitive private schools now say that they do not report class rank. Of course if you are in the top 10 % the guidance counselor will take pains to make that clear to the colleges.</p>
<p>There was a post for an Admissions Officer here, I think back in the summer, that said they do their best to figure out class rank for applicants. Most schools, even those that say they don't rank officially, provide some information to colleges (check their school profiles that go to colleges) so ranks can be figured out.</p>
<p>"So how do some of these highschools send such huge percentages to them?"</p>
<p>Because colleges know that to be in the second 10% at St. Paul's takes more skill and effort than it does to be valedictorian at some high schools in this country. There are high schools in this country that barely make the kids write papers. At St. Paul's, you have to have college-level skills to even make B's.</p>
<p>So colleges try to be fair and (1) not penalize kids because they are stuck in an unchallenging high school and (2) not penalize kids who are doing well at the toughest high schools in the country.</p>
<p>ctaprent2006,</p>
<p>Yes, colleges can impute ranks and probably do, but they do not include them in the statistics unless they are presented to them, in one way or another, by the HS. This is good for the colleges reported data and good for the private HS's that have worked out this elaborate dance with the colleges. I remember the conversation with the adcom from last summer. What he/she said, that was surprising to me, was that they include the data when it is provided informally by a HS counselor or in a recommendation. Of course that data isn't provided unless the rank is high. The data on the percentage of students who rank in the top 10% is very misleading, if taken at face value, and unduly discouraging to students from highly competitive HS's.</p>
<p>I agree that there a small number of High Schools, public and private, that have very high admissions standards. For those schools those 10% or better figures may not apply but for most they are a very good guide.</p>
<p>I don't think that students at restricted admissions High Schools and some very very few other schools will be at any disadvantage as the most colleges will be very well aware of the strengths of the student body at those schools.</p>
<p>Certainly I would agree that students at such High Schools should not be discouraged by those figures.</p>
<p>The WSJ has revised the list, adding 20 schools they missed before due to shoddy methodology:</p>
<p>I attend Boston Latin School. Last year we had: 28 Harvard admits, 3 Columbia admits, 1 Cornell admit, 6 Brown admits, 4 Dartmouth admits, 3 UPenn admits, 4 Princeton admits, 3 Amherst admits, 7 MIT admits, 12 McGill admits, 1 Middlebury admit, 24 NYU admits, 1 Northwestern admit, 25 Tufts admits, 3 Yale admits, 1 Caltech admit, 4 Johns Hopkins admits.</p>
<p>We dont fare well with Stanford at all.</p>
<p>Good to see they made the correction, I see our high school there now.</p>
<p>It's still a joke methodology because of the colleges they choose as destination colleges.</p>
<p>What is the purpose of this survey, and why does anyone care enough about the results to dissect them? Is it any surprise that high schools whose students are the academic elite or the spawn of the rich and powerful send those students to colleges that seek the academic elite and the spawn of the rich and powerful? I'd be interested to learn about an inner city school that consistently sends a few kids to top colleges, or any institution that performs some sort of alchemy on its students, but this data tells me nothing of note. It's not as if these schools have discovered some special technique for nurturing young minds. They just house a variety of superstars for four years.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd be interested to learn about an inner city school that consistently sends a few kids to top colleges, or any institution that performs some sort of alchemy on its students, but this data tells me nothing of note.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You should be looking somewhere else for that data because it's not how this data is used for. But it doesn't mean this data doesn't serve its purpose. For parents that are paying north of 30,000/year for private school, this data is important. For colleges that want to know profile of various high schools, this information is of interest.</p>
<p>I'd really like to see if there was a way you could correct for the high percent of legacies of elite schools likely to be found in this cohort. As well as the likely high percent of big-time donors or potential donors. I think the bigger question is, for a smart kid who is NOT otherwise hooked (legacy / donations), how much of an advantage does he get from going to one of those schools versus a good decent public high school.</p>