<p>There are many threads on this board asking for recommendations on “safety” schools. While these non-ACRONYM schools are academically excellent, most applicants give them short-shrift. </p>
<p>Would most kids be better off at a non-ACRONYM school? </p>
<p>The reality is that while the ACRONYM schools convey a sense of status, they are academic pressure-cookers. Smart kids will study their butts off to find that they can only achieve a middling class rank despite earning an A-average there. Let’s face it. Class ranking does matter.</p>
<p>Are kids hurting their chances of getting into an elite college by going to an ACRONYM school?</p>
<p>Selective colleges are well aware of the boarding school scene. They are also very familiar with the top day schools in the country. They understand that being middle ranked at an ACRONYM school could be equal to being high ranked in a less competitive school, private or public. Say you were at the top 20% of a school like Andover (even though I think they don’t rank) Andover has a very strong reputation at colleges, and is also a pretty large school. More than 1,000 of the best students in the country. Colleges know what a student is up against. They might see being at the top 20% of Andover as being equal to being at the top 5% at a public school. But, some of those people at the top 5% of a public school could very well be at the top 5% at Andover as well, just depends on the student.</p>
<p>My percents are by no means accurate or applicable, so don’t take that part too literally.</p>
<p>Your example mentions the top 20% at Andover. My point is that would the bottom 80% of a very elite student body been better able to distinguish themselves at another school.</p>
<p>GMTplus7, I think you got it. It’s a bad deal in terms of college admissions. Think of it this way, for kids with no “hook”:</p>
<p>top 1% in a mediocure public school, or top 5% in a competitive PS or a less competitive day/boarding school, or top 10-15% in top day (eg famous NYC or boston day schools) or top BS</p>
<p>For best college placement, find the place where your kid can get into those ranges. It does seem to me public school is the best bet and makes a lot of economic sense too.</p>
<p>I’m applying to boarding school, and it’s not all about the college admissions chance. I am completely bored at my current school. So I think that BS offers a chance to grow academically and socially not just a stepping stone for college.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The fact that some smart kids achieve only “middling class rank” ignores the more compelling fact that many smart kids do exceptionally well at prep school. So why be a defeatist and assume failure before you strive for success? </p></li>
<li><p>Doing well at top prep schools like Andover and Exeter has a different meaning than excelling in a public high school. Where only the top, top kids at public schools typically get into elite universities, thirty percent or more of the class at Andover regularly gets admitted to the Ivies, MIT, and Stanford. Moreover, I believe that something like the top 70% of students at Andover get admitted to top 50 universities and liberal arts colleges. Exeter and SPS also have very impressive college matriculation statistics.</p></li>
<li><p>I don’t know about other schools, but the College Profile at Andover suggests that an A- there would place a student quite highly in the class. (Andover grades on a 0-6 scale; a 6 is a 93-100 and a 5 is an 85-92 as a rule of thumb; O.4% have a 6.0; 7.1% are between a 5.5 and a 5.9.).</p></li>
<li><p>The fact that top schools like Andover and Exeter are pressure cookers does not mean that they are not also fun and rewarding places to attend school. For the great majority of students, the experience of attending these schools is a good in itself – one that exists regardless of what college a student ultimately attends. If college admission were the only criterion of high school success, public schools might be far preferable to boarding schools.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Okay you can compare that as bottom 80% at top boarding school compared to bottom 80% at public school too. I was just trying trying to show you the difference. I personally think the the only way it would hurt is in leadership. It would be extremely hard to get leadership positions at a top school but if you are one of only a few bright motivated students at a public school then you are more likely to be elected as class president or president of a club.</p>
<p>Somebody I know once referred to Andover and Exeter as “college for 14-year-olds.” Some fourteen-year-olds need that challenge; most do not. A great many kids will not be able to get into the ACRONYM schools, but would be able to benefit from many of the opportunities available to them elsewhere. The largest, richest schools have resources that other schools do not, but they might not offer the kids who aren’t “stars” leadership opportunities that smaller schools might. Both my boys are at a non-ACRONYM school. It was not a top choice for either, but they were accepted there and it has served there very different talents and challenges pretty well. My older son has had the opportunity to act in student productions since freshman year, and to take a theatre arts class all year, for four years, with an IB certificate program in theatre (despite shaky grades overall). He has not had good grades, but all seniors take IB-level English and, if they elect, History. Those opportunities would not be available to an underachiever at our public high school. My younger son has been elected to Student Council, named to a prestigious environmental planning committee, participated in Junior States and Model UN, and been the JV football manager. He might not have been able to do all that elsewhere, being utterly unathletic and socially awkward. Kids who love sports, but aren’t especially talented, should also consider smaller schools, where there are “no-cut” policies in effect for JV teams and they have a shot at playing. The larger prep schools recruit repeat juniors and post-grads for most varsity sports.</p>
<p>The most important thing for us has been to find a school that fits our child. Perhaps your child has grades, scores, and intellect but does not have the capacity to deal with stress, but can still thrive in a close knit and structured boarding community. Boarding School offers much more than the prestige of an acronym, or the chance to attend an ivy. It is important for us to find a school that values the journey. On the flip side, I know plenty of great people who went to SPS, Hotchkiss, Andover, Groton, and ended up at my mediocre college, had a wonderful educational experience and made friends for life. No doubt though, being the kids who went to these schools, and then ended up at “party school in the Northeast” carried a stigma, and I am sure every time they open up their BS alumni magazine, they are reminded that they did not become an ambassador. In “The Greene’s Guide to Boarding Schools” 2006, they talk about the idea of the top one-thirder. This is the route that we are taking. We aren’t looking at HADES or applying to GLADCHEMMS. I’m sure this is not for everyone, but it is the strategy that we have used, and we have met amazing people along the way, who truly want to nurture and educate our children.</p>
<p>I think in terms of college admission, the parents of top school students are concerned about their kids’ chances to the tip top few colleges, to which I say find a school where you can be among the top few of your class. But remember outside the top 10 boarding schools, the HYPMS rate, for example, quickly sinks to low single digit, which remind you includes those WITH hooks too. So be careful when you say you’d have a better chance of getting in the most selective colleges if you attend a small “nurturing” boarding school. For that purpose, go for a competitive PS, and become a super star there. That’s the best way. If you are looking for the quality of education and the possible rigorous training one can possibly get from a high school, well, I’d say the top schools are still the best - for the qualified students of course.</p>
<p>By OP’s definition, 70-80% of students in any school would be better off to find a lower tied school. The logical but absurd conclusion would be to attend the least challenged school you can find, and be the #1 in the class. </p>
<p>I think there is a misconception that if you are admitted to these HADES schools, you suddenly become the smartest kid in the planet. They are still just normal kids, some will be doing better than others four years later in college matriculation. Not everyone admitted to HADES will be going to Ivies/MS, the same as not everyone graduated from Ivies/MS will succeed in their careers later on.</p>
<p>If you apply and get admitted, it means the school believes that you can make it. However no one can guarantee you anything. You make who you are and who you will be.</p>
<p>Not my intention to be defeatist. My musings stem from DS’s first year at ACRONYM school and his shock at the intensity of the academic workload compared to what his friends at prev school back home reported to him during Break about their workload.</p>
<p>DS is thriving, but nearly every minute is scheduled. He loves it there, and our family has no regrets. But I sense that his younger siblings may not be happy in such an uber intense environment. Hence, my caution on another thread to be careful of what you wish for.</p>
<p>I think our kids are best off attending the school that makes sense for them. DS1 attended a non-ACRONYM bs, and it was a fabulous and enriching experience for him. @GMT, he was still scheduled nearly every minute, in my (very) limited experience, I think that’s just part of the philosophy of most boarding schools. </p>
<p>DS2 is applying to bs this year, and he is applying to ACRONYM schools, because they make sense for him. </p>
<p>College admissions are very similar to boarding school admissions, those few elite colleges/universities have such small acceptance rates, they’re not a guarantee for anyone, regardless of grades, scores, ecs, hooks, or legacy status. Those points all contribute toward being competitive, not a sure thing. One major difference is that there are many, many more (qualified) kids applying for those limited slots. </p>
<p>All my long winded way of saying IMO the school your DC is best off attending is the one that offers the magical combination of a) an environment where you and your child can envision him/her thriving, reaching, growing, smiling, without drowning, b) an offer of admission, and c) affordability.</p>
<p>I’ve seen more “dissatisfied” parents of top school students than otherwise, especially when their kids are in the college admission process or right after it. While 60%+ of Andover graduates go on to great colleges (top 25 universities and top 15 LACs) and 80%to good colleges (top 50 universities and top 25 LACs), apparently many parents think their kids should get “better” results. I can think of a few scenarios where parents could be disatisfied.</p>
<p>Scenario A: DC was number 1 in her middle school. If she had stayed back at our PS, I’d expect her to get in HYP but she ended up at Dartmouth after attending BS. Look at her old classmate Sally. She couldn’t get in the BS DC got in and “had to” stay back but now she is attending Princeton.</p>
<p>Scenario B: I knew top BS would be competitive and didn’t expect DC to be an ivy admit from there, but after seeing how hard he had worked and knowing how much he would’ve accomplished in a less competitive school, I feel that it is unfair that he is not getting into an Ivy league school. He’s A LOT better than MANY Ivy admits.</p>
<p>Scenario C: I thought they said 30%+ of their graduates get in Ivies and the like, but DC graduated top 25% of her class and great ECs but was having a hard time getting in an ivy. I feel I was misled or even fooled. </p>
<p>Scenario D: I thought the focus of the school was all about college admissions (otherwise how did they get stella matriculation records), but they never mention college until mid way in 11th grade and have never “pushed” hard enough for DC. Had they provided more “support”, DC would’ve be better off in college outcome.</p>
<p>DAndrew, you present some important points and scenarios, that I believe are valuable for families to think about when deciding which high schools to apply to (hopefully with a couple of choices at the end). A great thing about this board is the opportunity to read about and have these discussions, so each family can make the most informed decision possible. </p>
<p>If the be-all, end-all is an Ivy/Stanford/MIT, perhaps ACRONYMs, or any of the top 50 boarding schools, aren’t the best choice. Same as the boarding schools, colleges are building a class, and want a diverse student body. There’s a limit to how many slots will be offered to any given hs. Here’s where we find ourselves back to the cc-proverbial tuba playing-featherweight wrestler needed. Then again, I’ve heard a lot of stories about stellar, gifted kids who end up underachieving and having fewer options at the end of high school because of boredom leading to giving up, or not being surrounded by peers who are striving for more. </p>
<p>I know you’re correct, there are families who are and will continue to be deeply disappointed with that type of scenario. (on a side note, my mom-heart hurts for a teen whose family would focus on the rejection from a school with an 11% admit rate, and not on the acceptance from a school with a 21% admit rate–btw, I made those %s up, for illustrative purposes only) </p>
<p>The one thing I know for certain is that many things can change in 4 years, both good and bad, and many of those possibilities aren’t under my control. :)</p>
<p>DAndrew has done a nice summation of scenarios that have been played out in real time on CC in the past. I’ll add </p>
<p>Scenario E: Child comes from a rural area where there is no college counseling, other than sending out transcripts to colleges when student requests them; no AP or IB classes; one foreign language offered; sports that have had state meet level athletes, yet have never yielded a recruited athlete; exactly two Ivy/MIT acceptances in the past 15 (20?) years. Child goes to a selective boarding school on generous FA and does well academically; begins taking AP tests sophomore year after taking classes that aren’t even labelled AP; finds a new sport in which he/she thrives with significant potential for college recruiting. All of which suddenly makes an admit to an Ivy a very real possibility, should he/she choose it.</p>
<p>I think there are significant numbers of students out there for whom a selective bs remains a significant lift up and opens far more doors than it closes. Scenarios A through D presuppose a public school system not available to many, many kids. </p>
<p>That said, do less selective bs’s offer the same lift up and out? That’s a very real question for my family right now, as we consider scenarios for child number two.</p>
<p>It’s worth noting that the authors also studied the effect on college admissions for those students who attended the “elite72,”
</p>
<p>The schools are not named. Seventy-two is much more than the handful of schools commonly discussed on this site. We are fortunate to have so many strong schools in this country.</p>