<p>It only makes sense that a highly selective prep school or boarding school that only takes top students into its student body, then has a high percentage of students who are admitted to top colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haha, I am glad this position was introduced with “Jokes aside.” Could have fooled me! </p>
<p>The beauty of views that are exceedingly local is that the holders of such views are oblivious to their inherent limitations. Lacking the recognition of the denizens of Robert Frost country does not mean that schools outside the NE lack … prestige. </p>
<p>Harker should have considered borrowing a page from another “unknown” school in Los Angeles and rename itself Harvard Harker for immediate recognition in the NE villages.</p>
<p>Who cares if East Coasters have heard of Harker? It’s the adcoms at selective colleges who have indeed heard of it.</p>
<p>(xiggi, say “Harvard Harker” 20 times real fast. I dare you. 
)</p>
<p>Yale Harker sounds much better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amen. SO very tired of the continued provincial assumption that unknown in the NE = not prestigious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hard for a Texan, that’s for sure. However, it gets easier when borrowing a Boston accent. Would it not sound like Haaahvaad Haakaa? I’ll try tonight. :)</p>
<p>Guys, you are not listening and you are muddling the core points you yourselves have been making. You didn’t believe the prestige or name recognition of the private schools help admission to elite colleges. I was doubtful about it as well. What I said was to explain the high ivy rate of the 10 year old Harker high school, one shouldn’t do it from the prestige perspective but rather how the school provides practical help. Now, you are turning it into an argument about how east coast elitists do not recognize the prestige of west coast schools? Wow, I can see this thread go on for another 30 pages. Have fun! ;)</p>
<p>Edit: And, what conclusion do you want to make? That Harker has enough name reconginition among AOs that attending the school helps you get into elite colleges?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. The responses that nobody in the East has heard of Harker was simply to say that adcoms will have heard of it. That is just factual and not meant as “advantageous” or any other meaning.</p>
<p>That doesn’t imply that having going to Harker is what gets you admitted to elite colleges. Harker is full of high achievers and it is a no brainer that many such students will be admitted to elite colleges. The first point of selection was when they were admitted to Harker in the first place.</p>
<p>"What I said was to explain the high ivy rate of the 10 year old Harker high school, one shouldn’t do it from the prestige perspective but rather how the school provides practical help. "</p>
<p>the one boarding school we looked at was American Hebrew Academy (“the only pluralist Jewish boarding school in the US”) in Greensboro. Its pretty new, and not well known, AFAIK. They had very high rates of Ivy acceptances, IIUC. That was of course PARTLY due to their kids, but we got the impression it was also due to very intensive guidance counseling, far exceeding what you would get a public HS or at most privates. yes, you could duplicate that with a private consultant (in part - here though the college counseling was integrated with the school, which one imagines is an advantage) but at least thats something you get for your money.</p>
<p>I think this thread is muddling treatment effects and selection effects. The classic explanation is below.</p>
<p>“Social scientists distinguish between what are known as treatment effects and selection effects. The Marine Corps, for instance, is largely a treatment-effect institution. It doesn’t have an enormous admissions office grading applicants along four separate dimensions of toughness and intelligence. It’s confident that the experience of undergoing Marine Corps basic training will turn you into a formidable soldier. A modelling agency, by contrast, is a selection-effect institution. You don’t become beautiful by signing up with an agency. You get signed up by an agency because you’re beautiful.”</p>
<p>To some extent, the elite colleges are selection-effect institutions. It’s not that you become magically smarter after going to those schools; you’re smart to begin with, so it’s no surprise you get top jobs, top graduate school admissions, etc. On CC, however, a heck of a lot of people like to pretend that elite colleges are treatment-effect institutions, as if these places are “transforming.” I think it’s the same argument down one notch at the hs level. Of course Harker (etc) kids do well in college placement. They were selected as smart kids in the first place.</p>
<p>“The Marine Corps, for instance, is largely a treatment-effect institution. It doesnt have an enormous admissions office grading applicants along four separate dimensions of toughness and intelligence. Its confident that the experience of undergoing Marine Corps basic training will turn you into a formidable soldier. A modelling agency, by contrast, is a selection-effect institution. You dont become beautiful by signing up with an agency. You get signed up by an agency because youre beautiful.”"</p>
<p>in fact training programs for foreign soldiers provided by US and allied forces, including for example that provided to Iraqi and Afghan forces right now, is done by people with access to the same training concepts (and indeed, some of the same teachers, experienced US non coms) as the USMC uses. They typically do NOT produce soldiers with the same degree of effectiveness as the USMC, IIUC. Ergo, its not that simple, even in that “clear cut” case. </p>
<p>You need to be trained to be a soldier. You need to be trained to be an architect or engineer or economist - and learning to write and think in a liberal arts course helps in many occupations. The institutions that have the best resources and teachers for training (the USMC, the best colleges, public and private) are also typically the most selective/have the strongest entrants. Its not easy teasing the effects out, and I dont trust folks who claim its all one way or the other. It might be nice in terms of calming down various social resentments if it were completely true, but the useful is not always true.</p>
<p>Benley said: “You didn’t believe the prestige or name recognition of the private schools help admission to elite colleges.”</p>
<p>Of course it helps . . . some . … and for a particular audience.</p>
<p>High schools - all kinds- develop relationships with ad comms at different colleges. For some reason the public school in my Town sends a LOT of kids to Northeastern . . . and the private schools one of my kids went to has a very good relationship with Harvard but not with U Chicago. It varies. And it helps kids get into some schools and doesn’t help them get into others. And that is school specific . . . look at how many kids from Nobles and Greenough go to Brown and how few go there from Roxbury Latin . . both “prestigous” here in the Northeast.</p>
<p>But the idea that one can get one’s kid into a HYPed school BECAUSE of attendance at a “prestigious” school . . . that’s poppycock. </p>
<p>AND . . . even mustard testers don’t try to come up with “one taste fits all” results and instead recommmend a number of “bests” depending on what flavor and kind of mustard one prefers:
[Best</a> Mustard: Our Taste Test Results - Slashfood](<a href=“http://www.slashfood.com/2009/09/01/mustard-taste-test/]Best”>http://www.slashfood.com/2009/09/01/mustard-taste-test/)</p>
<p>Benley, I will echo soozie’s response and add:</p>
<p>Admissions committees of top colleges make it their business to find out as much as they can about the high schools that their applicants have attended- whether they are high schools from the East, West, Middle, or South. They facilitate this by having regional admissions officers who travel to their regions, visit high schools, and generally get an understanding of the CONTEXT from which their applicants come, so they can evaluate the applicants in the CONTEXT of their high school and socioeconomic background.</p>
<p>The Intel Semifinalist from Harker is going to be slightly less impressive than the Intel Semifinalist from some not-too-famous public school in California, <em>because</em> Harker is a school that HYP knows provides considerable faculty assistance in preparing for the competition. So yeah, you could say Harker has ‘prestige’ but that prestige could work against an applicant in some instances. On the other hand the prestige could also work in favor of an applicant- a student who rises to the top of the Harker class is going to be recognized as being a very strong applicant while your generic valedictorian from an unknown public school will still have to show other forms of evidence of academic accomplishment.</p>
<p>Now obviously, I am only taking into consideration the factors that go into evaluating the <em>academic</em> credentials of an applicant. There are of course, other considerations such as legacy, athletics and development, and here is where Andover etc will have an edge over upstarts like Harker.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I think you are de-emphasizing the treatment effect too much. I think highly selective educational institutions- high school or college- do provide an environment that works best for those students. There is a positive benefit of living and working with peers who are at your own level. This is simply an extension of the same logic that underlies the common practice of placing the smarter kids into honors and advanced placement classes in a high school. And this is the logic that underlies the honors colleges in many State Universities.</p>
<p>So sure, there is a large selection effect, but the treatment effect is very real too.</p>
<p>^^^Agree with everything in vicariousparent’s post 453.</p>
<p>Also, in terms of legacy and development admits, I expect more to come from Exeter or St. Paul’s than a no-name public like ours. It would be a rare kid at our high school who is a legacy or development case. That is just one more reason why prep schools have a higher percentage of admits to elite colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does it? Typically, a school like Harker will get everyone into some prof’s research group and that’s it.</p>
<p>Most intel semifinalists are working with some established group outside of their own high school. Even schools like Harker don’t have the resources to do scientific research.</p>
<p>Do these schools rank their students for the college admissions process?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Typically, they don’t, but it’s not hard for colleges to get a general idea who is at the top of the class.</p>
<p>collegealum314: When I say ‘faculty assistance’ I’m not talking about in-house research. I’m talking about providing guidance and strategic advice- from what types of projects to take, how to present them, etc.</p>
<p>Most prep schools do not use class rankings. But some provide on the School Profile a distribution chart of GPA ranges for the various deciles in the class or something similar.</p>