<p>
</p>
<p>I know you’re trying to end the thread but … Princeton isn’t the only top school out there 
I believe there are many more Lynbrook kids at Stanford and MIT. I could be wrong though.</p>
<p>do princeton 2014’ers have access to this princeton facebook?</p>
<p>Whitney is a crap school. If anyone “had maximized all his/her academic and non-academic opportunities in his/her high school, and garnering all the awards he/she got with regards to his/her strong area of passionate interest” even from a school in the absolute worst ghetto, I think they’ll get in. </p>
<p>Actually, if they did that in the ghetto, they’ll have a better chance than someone who did that in any top public/private school.</p>
<p>That’s interesting to hear. The most honors, AP, community college courses — and all A’s — high chance of getting into good colleges.</p>
<p>The comparatively larger numbers of Lynbrook students at Stanford and MIT can be relatively easily explained, since those same trends exist for other good schools in the San Francisco Bay Area.</p>
<p>Stanford has a disproportionately large population from California. And disproportionately many more students in California apply to Stanford when compared to applicants to, say, Princeton. Thus the larger number of students from Lynbrook who attend Stanford compared to Lynbrook students who attend Princeton is expected, and thus cannot, with confidence, be attributed to any inherent “superiority” of Lynbrook.</p>
<p>Likewise, MIT is very clearly a tech school, which places much more emphasis on science and math ability compared to a place like Princeton, where ability in writing/humanities/social sciences, etc. is equally important. Given that Lynbrook has an absurd population of Asians and Asian Americans (close to 90%), which consists of a sizable population of immigrants (both those who are still not US citizens and naturalized citizens) it is expected that as a school they would do better in the non-English emphasizing disciplines, and thus be more successful in applying to MIT than Princeton.</p>
<p>I’m willing to bet that the same trend of sending more kids to Stanford/MIT is true for most of the schools in the Bay Area (it certainly is for the school I graduated from), for the same aforementioned reasons.</p>
<p>So the comparison of Lynbrook kids at Princeton to Lynbrook kids at MIT or Lynbrook kids at Stanford is not the correct comparison you want to be making if you want to determine “top” schools in California. The better comparison (assuming we’re using “# of kids sent to school X” as the metric for “top-ness”) would be to compare numbers of students from Lynbrook sent to Stanford versus students from School X sent to Stanford, etc.</p>
<p>As someone without access to that data (for all schools, anyway), I can’t provide data to back up my all of my claims, but there you go. At least at Princeton, Lynbrook kids are not common.</p>
<p>Lynbrook is a very respectable school, but in my opinion tends to have a tighter distribution of students of high ability, meaning that on average people are very smart, but there are fewer “Accepted to top-5 university”-smart kids than you would expect given the average.</p>
<p>There’s really no need for you to defend Lynbrook’s reputation as a good school. But to try and come up with reasons why it’s the very best in California would be fruitless.</p>
<p>Indeed. My doubts are cleared and I’m willing to close the thread on a pleasant note.</p>
<p>I think that this is a pretty good discussion…why do you keep trying to close it???</p>
<p>Hey all, </p>
<p>I haven’t posted anything here in a while, but I figured I’d weigh in here since I’m TJ class of 09 and now at Princeton.</p>
<p>I’d say there is very little doubt that the “top” student from TJ will get into Princeton. I’d say we feed into Princeton more so than we do Harvard or Yale. We typically have about 20-30 accepted per year, and probably a little over half attend. One thing to keep in mind about TJ is that we don’t rank, so being the “top” student isn’t as obvious as being valedictorian from TJ. Several people have all A’s with several APs, and I presume that there would be a pretty large cluster of people at the top of the GPA list, if one existed. That being said, it was pretty obvious who the brightest students were (I would not consider myself one of them), and almost all had impressive extracurriculars that let them stand out in the college admissions process.</p>
<p>Generally, however, the “top” few students at TJ get into every school they apply to, and the best in my class (in my opinion) went to Harvard. (1 or 2 who were more tech-focused may have gone to MIT)</p>
<p>Edit: I also agree with the person who said that somebody who maximized their opportunities in the ghetto would have a better chance of admission to Princeton than a great student from TJ. Not only do colleges look favorably upon “overcoming obstacles,” but the level of competition wouldn’t even be comparable. Excuse my elitism, but honestly, lots of incredibly smart and talented people from TJ get absolutely shafted in the college admissions process because they are overshadowed by their peers at TJ. I believe many of these students would have gotten in to top top schools had they attended probably any other high school in America (barring maybe Stuy). Still, TJ was an incredible opportunity and I would never recommend anyway forgo it because it might damage their chances at HYP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I appreciate your “sophisticated” analysis, but dude, you’re not even arguing on the same point anymore. I’m not comparing the number of Lynbrook kids at Princeton to the number of Lynbrook kids at Stanford and MIT. The fact that Lynbrook sends more kids to Stanford and MIT than Princeton is not my basis for saying it is a top CA school; I know that this trend makes sense. Stanford, MIT, and Princeton are all top schools, however, so the fact that Lynbrook sends many kids to Stanford and MIT makes it more or less equal to a school that sends many kids to Princeton.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lol … I never made the comparison you’re saying I made … in fact, the comparison I made is the one you suggested. Lynbrook sends many kids to Stanford and MIT and I have no problem believing that they send more to these schools than other Bay Area high schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From this statement I inferred that you meant “there are many more Lynbrook kids at Stanford and MIT” than the 4 Lynbrook kids at Princeton. You gave no statement that would have suggested otherwise. So it’s your fault that you weren’t clear, not my fault that I took the obvious interpretation from your statement. No need to get your panties in a bunch, dude.</p>
<p>As to whether Lynbrook sends more or less kids to Stanford/MIT than other Bay Area high schools, I’d like to see some data on that. I explicitly mentioned that since I personally don’t have that information, I can’t conclude one way or another. You’re saying that you “have no problem believing that they send more to these schools than other Bay Area high schools” but if you don’t have the actual numbers, you’re just blindly believing. So I assume you have the actual data?</p>
<p>My high school sends 10-15 students to Stanford each year, and we’ve never been mentioned as a contender for “top high school in California.” So does Lynbrook blow that figure out of the water? I doubt it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lol, you’re the one getting all know-it-all on me bro. There’s nothing to infer from my statement, it’s completely transparent. I claimed that there are more kids from Lynbrook at Stanford and MIT than at Princeton. You agreed that this was logical. You claimed that Lynbrook is not a top school based on the fact that there are only 4 Princeton kids from Lynbrook; I suggested that Lynbrook can still be considered a top school because it has many acceptances to Stanford and MIT, also elite schools. Thus, on the basis of college acceptances, Lynbrook can still logically be considered a top school. I don’t see what the problem is.</p>
<p>I don’t have exact numbers (only general anecdotes), but then again, neither do you. I could be blindly believing, but you could be too. And at least in the discussions that I’ve had about top CA schools, Lynbrook comes up in them. There’s no use disputing that point and you gain nothing from it.</p>
<p>And yet you gain so much from defending it, right?</p>
<p>Your statement is obviously not transparent, as I made a different interpretation than you intended. Thus it was at least somewhat ambiguous - hardly “transparent.” You can’t simply claim that something is obvious when it is only obvious to you. That’s what communication is.</p>
<p>I did not claim Lynbrook was not a top school, merely that it was not THE top school. The original point still stands, that despite how good Lynbrook is, it curiously does not send as many graduates to top schools (including MIT/Stanford) as you would expect, given how great of a school it is - both reputedly and in reality.</p>
<p>I hope your bros and dudes up in New Haven appreciate your style of debate more than I do - I would hate for you to have a poor college experience due to something silly like your attitude.</p>
<p>Admissions are subjective. Graduating top of your class, albeit, at one of the best high schools in the country, doesn’t mean you’re a sure shot anywhere. Essays are looked at, ECs are looked at, and the person is evaluated holistically. </p>
<p>Do you honestly think that students with top ranks are automatically admitted into any top ranked university?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m only defending it because you’re attacking it (doh!)</p>
<p>And it’s not something you can even logically attack: Lynbrook comes up in conversations <em>I’ve had</em> about top CA schools. That is a fact. I am not claiming that Lynbrook is absolutely a top school and there is no way around it, I am only defending it against the illogical conclusions you have made about it based on only Princeton data while acknowledging that logically Lynbrook kids are far more prevalent at Stanford and MIT. And the fact remains that there are people who consider Lynbrook a top school because it has come up in conversations I have had.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it really is transparent. You clearly understood my statement …
… but you chose to interpret the argument behind my statement in a way that is completely illogical. Not my fault. I honestly don’t know if anyone would’ve thought of it the same way you did.
I never REMOTELY suggested that the basis for Lynbrook’s “superiority” was that it had more Stanford admits than Princeton admits. If I did, that would mean I would value a school that has 10 Stanford/5 Princeton over 10 Princeton/5 Stanford; definitely not. What I did suggest, however, is that Stanford is a top school and it admits many students from Lynbrook, so Lynbrook cannot be disqualified as a top CA school simply because of its Princeton numbers (which you suggested). This means that, even if some CA school has 10 Princetons while Lynbrook only has 5, Lynbrook is not disqualified as a top CA school because it could have 10 Stanfords and the other school 0. These are completely logical statements and it’s not my fault that you can’t understand something so basic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In an effort to win the argument, newest newb has curiously resorted to manipulating my argument. Please indicate to me where I claimed Lynbrook was THE top school in California. Right, I didn’t. There’s no way around that one; I never used THE in front of top school and even if you were silly enough to believe that the list on my original post was in descending order, Lynbrook would still be second.</p>
<p>In fact (looking back on it), my original post didn’t even use the word “top.” I used the word “famous,” which is certainly not the same thing, and as far as I’m concerned, the name Lynbrook comes up a lot in discussion of CA schools. Even if we look at my other posts defending Lynbrook, never once did I refer to it as THE top school, but merely a top school. And according to what I quoted above, you agree that Lynbrook is a top school. So please tell me why you have been arguing against my position that Lynbrook is a top school this entire time.</p>
<p>It’s a sad day when a Princeton student 2 years into his college career has to change my argument in order to maintain his position.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You know, I thought about resorting to making sarcastic comments about your inability to comprehend basic, logical statements, choice to manipulate my arguments in your favor, etc. and link them to your study at Princeton, but I thought that would just be a lowly move best left to the arrogant elitists at Princeton.</p>
<p>^ Oh, whoops.</p>
<p>Poor college experience? What exactly constitutes a poor college experience? Maybe something along the lines of I’ve-been-at-Princeton-for-2-years-and-I-can’t-even-understand-basic-logic-or-win-simple-arguments-without-changing-my-opponent’s-position? Or maybe it’s spending-time-arguing-about-high-school-which-I-haven’t-experienced-in-2-years-on-a-college-forum-when-I-should-have-better-things-to-do-because-I’m-in-college.</p>
<p>Bro. Dude.</p>
<p>I’m out.</p>
<p>I’ll let your ad hominem arguments and clear lack of professionalism be the last images anyone gets from our little dispute here. I hope you’ll agree.</p>
<p>Lynbrook is a great school, indeed. It doesn’t need people to argue for it, especially when those people argue without facts and in a disrespectful manner.</p>
<p>Lol I went to Whitney. There’s a lot of dumb****s there who manage to get in based on the state testing. Troy is far superior to Whitney.</p>
<p>The best student at those schools (given that he also has unparalleled EC involvement) will be accepted to a multitude of top schools. However, you can’t be certain that Princeton wants that student. …Unless he’s some insane double-legacy, recruited, developmental URM with stellar stats and ECs to match. Ultimately, there are no guarantees in the college admissions process. Guaranteed.</p>
<p>Oh, and truffliepuff…
</p>
<p>^ Speak for yourself. And for the record, you went to Whitney for less than a year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry to bumpp this question but I was just wondering if anyone knew the answer :)</p>
<ol>
<li>This question is super-vague. What do you mean, “all relevant awards”? Like an Olympic gold medal? Also, if the kid shows up to the interview and is rude to the interviewer, or plagiarizes an essay (or writes a horrible essay), then no matter how amazing their academic characteristics are, they’re not getting in.</li>
</ol>
<p>Being number 1 at TJ isn’t an instant acceptance into Princeton, even from TJ your ECs need to be the best. Our top student academically this year got rejected from a lot of schools. Those that are in the top few at TJ are basically academically close enough that it doesn’t matter, ECs (and essays) really seem to make the applicant.</p>