<p>Like I said before, nowhere did I say that I think prep school kids are better. However, that doesn’t change the fact that in my opinion, these kids’ experiences living away from home in high school made them mature faster and thus when they get to college, they disproportionately exude a certain confidence one cannot find from most students. When you throw somebody out into the world to live on their own and in an intellectually enriching environment to boot, they will mature faster than they otherwise would and probably faster than the average kid out there. That’s not to say others can’t catch up later on though.</p>
<p>Like I said before, of course, mature and intelligent students can come from any background, not just prep schools. I even acknowledged that most students at elite colleges come from public schools.</p>
Well, basically you did in your comparisons of the prep school club leader vs. the ‘regular HS’ club leader and the intellect/etc. of the students who elect said leaders. I’m sure you’re a bright person so you s/b able to see that in your posts whether you meant for that message to come across or not. If you feel that way then fine - that’s your right whether some of us agree with it or not.</p>
<p>I have to be honest with you though. Those leadership positions do carry more weight than your average leadership position. I can’t give you evidence without divulging information about where the leaders from my prep school went to college and what their specific leadership positions were. Almost every single one got into an elite college. By contrast, you will see students on CC post their 10 leadership positions and they still get rejected by these same schools. Sure, other factors could be at work, but something must be getting these students into these elite colleges without them having to kill themselves over maintaining 10 leadership positions.</p>
<p>Post # 14 seems to conflate the two terms. First you talk about prep schools and “regular” (ie public?) schools. Then you make mention of boarding schools. The two terms are not interchangeable, and it was anythig but clear. Enough time wasted at the ■■■■■ feeding trough.</p>
<p>Yeah, we know that public schools have a good education too. It’s not just about the education. Good breeding is also important, and is a reason why graduates from Andover are prized highly in elite circles. They are not just good within the academic sphere, but within the human sphere as well. In fact, I would take it a step further than just the human sphere. Andover has some of the most exceptional mammals I have ever come across, a result, no doubt, of exquisite breeding.</p>
<p>If you want to read more about good breeding and its importance in college admissions, you should check out “The Gatekeepers: the quest for manly gentiles.” It’s a good read.</p>
<p>nychomie, re: post 125…well, I just have to say that both my kids were leaders, but they did not have 10 leadership positions. Seemed to work out just fine. In fact, it went beyond leadership to creating new initiatives that they led, not some elected type office. When they got to their very selective universities, they went onto significant leadership positions there too, even though they were now mixed in with lots of prep school kids (who you say are more mature) and all that. One of my kids went off to college still at age 16. I believe these colleges recognized their leadership and potential to serve in such capacities at their colleges and in fact, rewarded them in college for this. Quality, not quantity, mattered.</p>
<p>The difference is that a school such as Andover has a much higher concentration of excellent students and leader types than a public school that cannot select their student body. It only makes sense that more kids from Andover go onto elite colleges than the very miniscule amount of students from our high school. However, that small amount from our measly high school are very bit as qualified as the larger number from Andover who land at the same elite colleges. Somehow, kids like mine, end up in leadership positions and winning top awards once they get to these same colleges where they mix with the “mature and bright” prep school kids. Imagine that. It happens.</p>
<p>nychomie, so I take it you went to an elite boarding school, yes? And you went to Princeton (may still be going or are an alum)…did you hobknob with the lowly public school kids once you were in college? What was that like? Or did you keep to your prep/boarding school cohorts?</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean they were accepted to the particular colleges because of their leadership positions. It might have helped, just as having a leadership position for a student attending a ‘regular HS’ (whatever you think that is) will likely help as well. You and I both know that the academic qualifications of these students afforded them by their expensive education was a significant factor. As with the ‘regular HS’, a leadership position of depth is a plus on top of the academics. </p>
<p>Regarding the ‘10 leadership positions’ - I assume you were exaggerating but if not - almost any info on the subject discounts the idea of a kid having 10 leadership positions since there’s no way they could have much depth in any of them and the colleges are looking for more depth on fewer positions rather than superficial involvement on many. When adcoms see an applicant with a large number of stated positions like this they know they couldn’t have had much depth.</p>
<p>We can use a couple of examples - example A has a student elected to student body leader by fellow students (and it doesn’t really matter whether it’s at the prep or the public) and example B has a student who of her own volition decided to start a work experience/job shadowing initiative at the HS, performed all the background work necessary, presented it to school leadership and had it approved, then carried it through to become a successful and enduring program at the HS and we have example C of a student who of his own volition decided to start a tutoring/mentoring program for students in challenging environments, performed the background work necessary to get it going, sold it to the school leadership, and carried it through successfully.</p>
<p>Which of the above would you give more credence to - the kid in example A or the kids of examples B and C? </p>
<p>I’m not taking anything away from the person in example A and compared to an equally academically qualified person may be more desirable, but I’m saying there are more significant leadership positions than being elected leader of some club at a school and even within a school there’s a difference in the leadership positions since as you know, they don’t all entail the same amount of required leadership effort as others at the same school.</p>
<p>You might even find that the leader of xyz club or student body at a ‘regular HS’ could possibly be more accomplished in this regard than at the prep school depending on what that individual actually did while in the leadership position. Maybe the one at the public HS helped to establish some effective programs to help deal with gang issues at the HS, to help with some of the students who are learning challenged, to help arrange for those who can’t afford prom dresses to acquire them, etc. It’s possible that the student body leader at the prep school didn’t get involved in activities quite as challenging as these.</p>
<p>Sure, I agree. However, in post #79, I was talking about the SAME positions only, as in president of student body at Andover vs. president of student body at regular HS. I agree it all comes down to what you did while holding that position, but the president of the student body at Andover almost always holds significant duties and takes initiative in impressive ways. In addition, the standards to be president of Andover is almost always higher than to be president of an average HS. Combined with the prestige of Andover and the track record of previous presidents, these elite colleges are immediately convinced of the president’s candidacy provided he has an excellent academic record as well. I’m not saying regular high schools don’t have kids just as impressive, but like I said before, they just have to be vetted more.</p>
There. That’s exactly right. I think the debate on whether elite prep schools help admission to elite colleges is really asking the question whether attending an elite prep school makes admission to an elite colleges easier - in other words, does the same prep school student need to make less effort to achieve the same result than he would in a public school? If you think of it, GPA doesn’t mean much because a B or an A in different schools could mean very different things. Same goes with leadership positions. If a student in an academically rigorous prep school maintains a high GPA and still manages to be one or two club presidents, the colleges just know how good he is, which is at least comparable to the public school star with a lot more written on their resume. So, back to the question - does going to an elite prep school save one’s effort? Barely. Actually in a highly competitive environment like Andover’s, one needs to work harder, and even more so when without the family support.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if you have visited those schools, you’d know what they are about. They are basically fine liberal arts colleges for teens. For the right kids, it means a great deal more than just elite college entrance tickets. It’s an experience in itself. Just as all Harvard graduates can’t expect to be accepted to top law scools or medical schools, all Andover kids don’t get to go to elite colleges, but they have graduated from Andover, which means something too.</p>
<p>Benley, that’s exactly right. If I had the money, and an elite prep school was located near me (we didn’t want to send our kids away to boarding school), I would consider it for the experience itself and the fit for my kids and not anything to do with odds of college admissions. I am pretty sure my kids would have had a better high school experience at an elite prep school or in one of my kid’s cases, at a performing arts high school (neither of which exist in our area), but their odds of getting into their elite colleges or college programs would have been similar because they are the same person regardless of where they went to high school.</p>
Actually, there is a big difference between public school students and prep school students that you overlook. It is very common for highly capable students with strong leadership skills in a regular high school to eschew high school politics in favor of greater involvement in their community. They don’t see their high school as the center of their universe – they look beyond that. It’s a lot harder to do that at most boarding schools, simply because of physical & geographical limitations – as well as the fact that the boarding school environment creates an age-segregated community. </p>
<p>It’s not necessarily the case that being student body President is Big City High is meaningless - it is just that the elite college is turning down the student body Pres. in favor of the young person who served on the Mayor’s Commission for such-and-such, and held a paying job as “assistant manager” of a retail store. I think some parents whose kids are doing very well in elite school environments would be amazed at what some 16 and 17 year olds living at home are capable of accomplishing in their lives.</p>
<p>That supports my point. At the prep school, you can be the student body president or president of a high-profile club and have your ECs covered. At a regular HS, you have to go above and beyond, seek opportunities outside the school, get other kinds of recognition, etc. That’s not to say one is more impressive than the other, but it does show that the prep school itself does give an advantage to the student who could thrive there and attain such leadership.</p>