<p>I understand this can be the case as there will be more competition in a top tier boarding school vs in a public school. My understanding of the competition is more about academic, leadership or other special talent related to the individuals. But I was surprised when I read the article below. <a href=“WSJ.com - For Groton Grads, Academics Aren't Only Keys to Ivy Schools”>http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/Polk_Groton_Grads.htm</a>
So the competition is more about the family background, fortune, power, etc. I believe this is not unique in Groton School, but in any top tier boarding schools where quite a fraction can come from a powerful background (whether in money, power, or fame). This article is a decade ago. Is it still the same today? </p>
<p>I’m not really sure… It still could be an issue.</p>
<p>This is absolutely still the same today. As a second year applicant, I found out a lot about things like that. Legacy kids always have an edge. Underrepresented minorities have an edge. If you can pay in full, you have an edge. Any kind of connections, particularly in admissions, can give you an edge. Social status (exp. if you’re related to a well known millionaire or something) can give you an edge, too. Some of those things matter more to some schools than others, but they all can give a potential edge. It’s a hard thing to accept when someone who may be less qualified than you gets accepted because of things like those mentioned above. I was a good applicant for the places I applied to this year (3 sports, arts, community service, have a job, other ec’s, solid grades, great interviews and application) but acceptance was always a concern. I’d need about 80% FA, Caucasian, east coast US - nothing “different” about those stats. Things turned out well this year, but it was a really stressful process knowing that it was likely that things wouldn’t turn out well for me despite being a “qualified applicant.”</p>
<p>According to [this</a> study,](<a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf"]this”>http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf) being a legacy has an advantaged of +160 when it is translated into SAT scores (old scale of 1600). Here are other factors in play:</p>
<p>Recruited athlete: +200
African-American: +230
Hispanic: +185
Asian: -50</p>
<p>So in Mr. Park’s case, he was competing with a legacy who had SAT scores of 1350, which is still not bad but not good enough for Ivies.</p>
<p>Reading this article is really depressing. My son is accepted by Groton. This article is somehow telling me that no matter what he achieves there, the other people who have the money, power, fame, connection will be surpassing him when it comes to college application. Our family has no power, fame or connection but does make enough that we pay our full tuition. </p>
<p>@Willburig No matter where you go in life, there will be people with more money and fame and power. That should never prevent you from following your dreams.</p>
<p>That brings up the question: does your son want to go to Groton to get into a good college, or does he want it for the Groton experience?</p>
<p>My son wants Groton experience. I have explained this article to him and he is actually fine with it. He said he wants the experience. It is me that is feeling hurt for him. I don’t care that other people have more money or fame or power, but I do care that people are treated equally. Of course, that is never always the case, but staying in a public school may give him a better chance to be treated equally. He is currently a top student in a top public school. </p>
<p>This is a topic discussed many times over on this board. Look it up. But I could summarize my view in a (possibly overly) simplied version as follows. For the most selective colleges, to be competitive, ideally the candidate should be BOTH a) highly qualified academically with defined passions; and b) have some sort of hook(s) such as money/power/connections, URM and whatever. But if you don’t have both you’d better be really, really good in one of them. Just being qualified wouldn’t get you in, and just having <em>some</em> money/power etc. wouldn’t either. One may argue that since prep schools have a higher concentration of both academic/talent stars and the rich and powerful, one would be better off in a PS since it’s easier to stand out. Yes and no. Yes, it’s always easier to be a bigger fish in a small pond, and big fish do catch the attention. No, because the AO’s know about different schools and they’d “make the adjustment” by taking more or fewer of the stars from different schools. That said, if you are sure you kid will be a super star in your local school then yes from college application perspective he should stay put - it’s probably the most “efficient” anyway. OTOH, don’t buy the idea that he’s doomed if he attends Groton no matter how “good” he is. That’s simply not true. </p>
<p>This article again. I not only read the article, I read the book. There is a flaw in Mr. Golden’s analysis. He treats class rank and SAT scores as infallible methods to rank applicants’ abilities. The most competitive universities don’t operate that way. They practice holistic admissions. If you search for “holistic” on this site, you’ll pull up many threads on which the topic has been beaten to death. On the Parent Forum, you’ll also find many threads pointing out that there are more than ten great colleges in the US.</p>
<p>It’s been 16 years since the class of 1998 graduated. It’s now possible to find some of the Groton classmates online. I wasn’t able to find all, as some of the female students probably married, and, well, good luck finding “John Roberts.”</p>
<p>Julia Halberstam has founded an elementary school in Nashville. Danielle Nunez is a Latin teacher at a co-educational public school in New York City. Lakia Washington teaches the sixth grade in Harlem.</p>
<p>Forbes McPherson has been busy:
</p>
<p>Brown, Princeton, and Harvard don’t exist merely to educate the world’s neurologists. They’re also very proud to educate teachers, writers, Marine Corps officers/businessmen, and many other professionals. Certainly their online news feeds boast of their graduates’ successes in such fields. </p>
<p>And, by the way? If you want to become a neurologist, Johns Hopkins is the place to go. </p>
<p>Agreed on the John Hobkins detail.</p>
<p>i’ve always wanted to go to johns hopkins…(i mean i want to go) but i heard the acceptance rate is like in the tens ._. </p>
<p>The first alumni review on Boarding School Review is (probably) a current senior at JHU! @JerseyGirl999</p>
<p>from kent right? i knooooow 
i read that too !!! i read on the college threads that early decisions acceptance rates are like 30% at jhu so i always have that but i have to do like a LOT of medical internships or research at kent in the next four years if i wanna be even considered… :0 @stargirl3 </p>
<p>Yeah I do know that I have an “edge” when it comes to admission because I’m African American, which does get “extra points” for doing “well” on the SAT. Pretty depressing, but it just makes me want to work harder so that I won’t need those extra points. And guys for the underrepresented minorities part don’t say that they got in JUST because of that. I worked my little tail off to get into the schools I got into and I will do the same for college and my career. But yeah it sucks that certain factors can just make someone so much more desirable even when they really aren’t even qualified. </p>
<p>Thats what I hate the most! When people say, “Oh he only got in because he was black. Stupid affirmative action.” No we get in because we are qualified and passionate students who could benefit from these institutions.</p>
<p>It might give you a leg up, but you couldn’t get in just because of your race. </p>
<p>Exactly. I was just saying that at my school I hear that all the time.</p>
<p>But why is this based on the color of one’s skin instead of their socioeconomic status?</p>
<p>Exactly! As people we are all the same yet socioeconomically some people are at a disadvantage. Why is the playing field not leveled for these people?</p>
<p>Study the heart out in school, go to college, study in a area where jobs are plenty(maybe pretty hard courses involved)…that is how my husband and I came out of the socioeconomical bottom </p>