<p>Personally I think it’s a great thing that all the elite schools have moved away from the traditional handshake from the headmaster, and make specific efforts to find kids from schools that aren’t on the traditional radar screen. THAT is a meritocracy, you know- not just rewarding those who were already born on third base. I love the diversity of high schools represented at my kids’ schools - from the Exeters and Daltons all the way to East Nowheresville High - not to mention homeschoolers and those from other countries. What could be more fantastic than a freshman class with that kind of diversity? THAT’s a learning experience I’m delighted to have my kids participate in.</p>
<p>Considering that about 11% of students attend private and religious affiliated schools, yet they account for 37% of the student body, there is a clear advantage for private over public schools. However, the qualifications of the private school group and college attendance rates for this group are also much higher, so this proves nothing.</p>
<p>Freshman class statistics for Yale and Princeton.</p>
<p>For Yale
Statistics on 2010-11 Freshmen Class
56% of matriculants came from public high schools.
44% of maticulants came from independent, parochial, and other schools.
13% of matriculants were Yale College and/or Graduate and Professional School legacies.
13% of matriculants are international students.</p>
<p>For Princeton
Admission 2010: Class of 2014
58.3% Public
21.3% Independent Day
9.7% Independent Boarding
10.2% Religiously Affiliated
0.3% Homeschooled
0.2% Military </p>
<p>The relevant comparison is what % of applicants to that given school attend private schools, not what % of students in the US overall attend private schools. If 11% of students in general attend private schools, but 37% of applicants to Ivy College A do, then if 37% of the student body winds up being from private school, it doesn’t “prove” any advantage at all.</p>
<p>There have been other threads on whether it’s an advantage (admissions-wise) to go to a private school or a selective magnet public school vs. a “regular” public school. Those stats in the previous few posts don’t tell you a lot, because the private and public magnets attract highly accomplished kids who would end up with high stats anywhere they went. They might get advantages from being in those selective schools–the top colleges know them, the advising might be better, the test prep might be better, the education itself might be better. On the other hand, it might be that any given Ivy will only take so many kids from any one private or public magnet, so some kids might have been better off (admission-wise) by staying in their home public school where they would (arguably) have been a bigger fish.</p>
I suppose the Dartmouth numbers could make this statement true if a significant percentage of the public schools students had attended academic magnets - but it would have to be close to half of them which seems highly unlikely. </p>
That may lend some credence to the idea that a lot of the kids are from public magnets, since there are quite a few really good public math/science magnets.</p>
<p>Of course the numbers we’re finding show the students who chose to attend, not everyone who was offered admission, so there’s part of the picture missing there too.</p>
<p>Exactly. Public school academic magnets require highly urbanized areas, for the most part. There is a serious lack of understanding on CC that the majority of kids in this country really have no “choice” beyond their local public school and whether that public is a good school or not is due to their luck of the draw in choosing their parents.</p>
<p>And very possibly achieved a higher GPA because of lower standards. At my D’s school, every year, there are parents of admitted students who come to parent orientation and then decide not to enroll their kids, after they are told that only 2% of the typical senior class graduates with 4.0 (UW) GPAs. They figure their kids will have a better shot at college admissions by staying at their public HS where the As come easier.</p>
<p>Naviance stats for accepted students at privates are much higher than the overall averages published on CDS. The bar is higher because the colleges are limiting numbers from any given milieu.
And do not forget that the privates supply a good percentage of legacies and URM’s and athletes, so the Naviance stats for their non-Hooked acceptees are often even higher, and the numbers accepted are not a big number- quite a few of the dots in the “ok” zone of acceptance are not green. I am saying this to show that the selectivity for elite HS kids with a given set of stats may actually be higher at the privates.</p>
<p>For sure, being at a private MAY confer a better education, smaller classes, better college advising. Even though the privates are referred to a college preparatory, attending one and doing well there is far from a tip.
In our family, we choose the best education we can afford for our children each step if the way. We have exposure to all types of schools.
IMO, boarding school kids are the most prepared and most ready for college, within a given stats set. But their records are often “marred” by errors, dry periods, turn-arounds, bad decision-making. These scars are great signs of growth to me. If a kid can live on their own and put together a great record, manage their own time, exercise self-discipline, become part of a community, pursue passions, I say WOW. I would surmise the AdComms do NOT view BS kids this way at all, however LOL.</p>
<p>At any elite HS, be it a private, a parochial, a BS, a competitive or selective admission public, our experience is that the AdComms do pay attention to the HS, per se, but that the competition within the school among the students is the biggest issue.
Interestingly, most of the privates have stopped sending in class rank, for this reason I expect: they do not want to the colleges all to pick the same top 10%, i.e. skim the cream- there is cream all the way through a lot of these competitive HS.
And skimming the cream off “no choice” publics is probably what they do.</p>
<p>Yes … but I would be willing to wager (having admittedly no data) that the huge majority of kids admitted to top-flight universities come from “highly urbanized areas.” That’s where the money is, and where the majority of wealthier parents live.</p>
<p>Annasdad, #1610, I’m guessing that many of the elite private schools look at class rank, course rigor, and what they know about the school and vicinity rather than just honing in on GPA since comparing GPA from different schools would be comparing apples and oranges.</p>
<p>Princeton says that 99% of its admittees are in the top 10% of their high school class. Yale and Penn say it’s 96%, Brown 93%, and Dartmouth and Cornell, 90%. (The others don’t say). So there aren’t too many of those diverse kids in the top 40% of the class getting in to those schools. Indeed, Yale and Princeton (didn’t check the others) say that 100% were in the top quarter of their graduating classes.</p>
<p>Edited to add: those figures may leave out schools that don’t rank, I guess. So maybe they really do take from the top 40% of some of those super-elite private and public schools. And so what if they do–they’re still getting obviously meritorious students.</p>
<p>Or, it’s the kids in those highly urbanized areas who choose to apply elsewhere (other than a state flagship). It’s difficult to tell whether it’s the chicken or the egg. You and I both know that plenty of smart kids in rural Illinois – even well-to-do ones – wouldn’t think twice about applying to UIUC and calling it a day.</p>
<p>I wonder about those kids in small towns and rural areas. Is it really the case that they don’t apply to (and get in) the top schools? I’ll bet that they do so much more than they did 30 years ago, in part because of this Interwebs thing.</p>
<p>PG - Even here in PA, in our fairly affluent and well-regarded public school district, a fair number of students who might be Ivy-qualified do in fact apply to Penn State and Pitt, perhaps adding Drexel to the mix if they are technically inclined, and then call it a day. I imagine that if every public school student with top stats were to apply to elite schools, admissions rates could go even lower.</p>
<p>Private school parents are mostly a different breed - I have heard a number of private school parents express shock that I would even think of allowing my children to apply to state schools. They also did not seem to understand why I would allow my children to spend lots of time in self-directed pursuits that did not lead directly (or even indirectly) to competitions or documentation that could build their resumes.</p>
<p>Public school parents OTOH tend not to understand why anyone would bypass a chance to enroll in Schreyer at in-state prices to go anyplace else except perhaps HYP or another elite school with copious merit aid.</p>
<p>I agree completely. But that’s hard to get across to some parents, to whom a 4.0 GPA is the Holy Grail to be eagerly sought, to guarantee their kids’ admission to HYPSM (or at least to give the parent whining rights when the HYPSM rejection letters come in).</p>
<p>There are colleges that eagerly recruit at my D’s high school because they value our graduates - not at the HYPSM/Ivy level of selectivity, but many in the 15-30% range. Rochester, Vanderbilt, Case Western, USC, admit far higher percentages from our school than from the general population. Our state flagship historically admits 96% of our applicants. And 10% of the class of 2011 is going to one of HYPSM+OtherIvy+CalTech.</p>
<p>Many of these kids would qualify for those schools had they stayed at their good suburban high schools, and it’s impossible to say whether out school helped or hindered their admission results. In my D’s case, coming from a small, poor, rural, crummy school, there’s no doubt that her college admission prospects have been substantially improved - although her GPA is nothing near what it would have been had she stayed home - and even less doubt that once she gets to college, she will be enormously better prepared.</p>
<p>“So maybe they really do take from the top 40% of some of those super-elite private and public schools.”</p>
<p>I think that’s right, if we’re talking about the handful of schools at the pinnacle of the food chain. I’m thinking Roxbury Latin and the like. Among their other attributes, those schools have small graduating classes, so we’re not talking about a big group in absolute numbers.</p>