<p>austinmtmom, BW was #11 on the list. I arbitrarily took the top 10 I could have easily taken the top 12, or top 15, or even the top 20. The argument remains valid.</p>
<p>Remember, that is not MY list. It is the list that MTPragmatist came up with. I didn’t want to argue the list here…that was done on the thread where MTPragmatist brought it up. As I said in my original post, I was using that list b/c there is not much else to use. (And, I happen to think the list s/he came up with was quite reasonable. We can argue whether Broadway is a good indicator of success until the cows come home, but this list is ONE way to look at it. Sure, there may be others, but I don’t have those at my disposal.)</p>
<p>My question was why do clearly talented kids who get into some of these top schools get rejected from schools that are farther down on this imperfect but interesting list. I think, if everyone reached deep into their hearts, and put aside their biases of where THEIR kid got into school/attended, etc., you would be able to come up with a list. If we all did that - set our biases aside and wrote down what we thought the top 10 schools were for whatever reason - I think in most cases, there would be a lot of overlap. Particularly for those of us whose kids have not yet been rejected anywhere and have not decided to go to a particular school. Everyone is so defensive about their kids’ school. I understand that. I’m sure I’ll be defensive about my D’s school, too. But I find it interesting that some of these kids get into the schools with great reps, but not others without great reps. And I was asking whether fit or type or yield was the answer. Thank you to those of you who tried to shed some light on this. I think the answer is a little of both. But I think yield does indeed come into play for some of these schools. Interesting…</p>