patrick.net

raindoctor says

New Renter, its a hypothetical. I am showing how the situation has changed in India for education and jobs. Since many are not aware of Indian elite schools, I have provided a rough translation in American terms. That scenario is hypothetical.

Definitely a hypothetical, partly due to so many of those elite graduates coming here as H1B employees.

And how is India dealing with that problem? Are they raising salaries to try to keep their talent local or even attract foreign talent or do they perpetuate myths of critical STEM employees shortages to ensure an over saturated market as was done here?

zesta says

Goran_K says

The past 3 U.S presidents all had Ivy League backgrounds. When was the last time you heard of a president from UCSB?

When was the last time you heard of a president from "hood high school?"

Take your pick:

Bill Clinton: Attended Hot Springs High School (public)

Ronald Reagen: Dixon High School, Dixon, Illinois (public)

Jimmy Carter: Plains High School (public)

Gerald Ford: Grand Rapids South High School (public)

Richard Nixon: Fullerton High School (public)

Pretty much EVERY president except the Bushes and Obama Now it's true George W Bush went to an elite high school Phillips Academy, It was his fathers Alma mater.

The Bush family is quite wealthy and VERY well connected which may have played a small part in GWBs admission to Harvard.

A disturbing trend is being presented here. United States has always been depicted as a meritocracy where one succeeds or fails based on their merits. However based upon views here that it's important to get into good schools and good neighborhoods in part due to connections and network opportunities that they provide reveals the fact that "United States" as pure meritocracy is propaganda to a large extent. Seems like "who you know" matters here just like in 95% of the world.

Not trying to rock the boat of perception, but some might say that the ability to network, and make friends in high places is a valuable skill in itself, worthy of merit.

dublin hillz says

A disturbing trend is being presented here. United States has always been depicted as a meritocracy where one succeeds or fails based on their merits. However based upon views here that it's important to get into good schools and good neighborhoods in part due to connections and network opportunities that they provide reveals the fact that "United States" as pure meritocracy is propaganda to a large extent. Seems like "who you know" matters here just like in 95% of the world.

Even the concept of meritocracy is elusive, unless one ties that concept with some metrics (scores, gpa, etc). Once it is tied, people beat the system. For instance, if SAT score is the sole indicator for meritocracy, people beat it; If it is pure grades, that can be beaten as well; if it is the kind of courses one takes, hire a couple of tutors for every such course; etc. All these can be beaten easily. That's when adcoms in old days wanted well rounded students. So, this well-roundedness can be bought: find a master piano teacher; find a master sports coach for your kid; etc.

Adcoms at HYP are faced with tons of well-rounded candidates with perfect scores, gpas, etc. So, they want students with compassion. This path is beaten as well: I know a couple of kids, who are volunteering in countries like Colombia, India. You know, why they are volunteering there? They are applying to Harvard/Yale/Stanford Law schools in a couple of years.

Not every parent has resources to beat the (invisible) system put at HYP. So, this creates problems for other parents, who want to send their kids to good local schools (like UCB). The folks who wanted to get into HYP, but couldn't get in, will end up taking slots once given to good students in, say, Mendota high school.

The real problem I see: lack of jobs with decent salaries, benefits and security (don't reply to this by saying that there's never been job security and other crap). This has lead to a pyramid game.

http://www.forbes.com/global/2010/0927/best-colleges-10-princeton-leadership-academy-get-into-harvard.html

In India, I heard they just use test scores for IIT admissions. So, many kids from rural places, take intensive coaching lessons and get into these places. Now the presidents of IITs (there are called directors in India) complain about that phenomenon, because it is not bringing in well-rounded candidates (my translation--because it has become harder for kids of the old educated elite to get into these places). They wanna put more hurdles there: we need to look at gpas in high school; extra curriculars; and all other crap. Even this can be beaten, if it is a numbers game. So, they will add some 'qualitative' and 'subjective' criteria, so that the old elite can get in!!

Put this way, people can beat any system, as long as admission criteria is measurable. The more hurdles you put (like volunteering, well-roundedness, etc), the longer it takes for the kids to get there--thats's why there are admission consultants who start shaping the students when the latter are 10 years old.

Let me put this way: Education is NOT about learning, even though it can lead to learning for many [for instance, I learned philosophy of sciences, phonetics, voice pedagogy, and macroeconomics after finishing studies. In fact, I claim that whatever I studied in schools is a pure piece of shit: I studied in order to make a living --unlike what HYP admits write in their admission essays that they want to change the world ]

Whatever you study in your school is not that useful in your real job. So, schools pre-select kids for future employers; that's the reason why people wanna go to HYP, so that they can work for those select employers like Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, McKinsey, etc.

If there were abundant jobs, people would do whatever they feel like. Instead, the primary goal has become "how to make a decent living". Of course, the parents don't admit that obvious truth.

The other main reason has to do with human psychology: how humans derive pleasure. I used to work as a security guard at some hospital. I overheard this Indian parent talking on his cell about his sons admission to MIT, etc. It was like 30 minutes talk. People derive pleasure by showing how exclusive/selective they are, as long such exclusivity/selectivity brings in financial benefits and social status. (Some one on death row is selective/exclusive; but no one wanna be there). The parents of a harvard admit derive tremendous pleasure among their relatives, friends and peers; and this creates jealousy among those peers, relatives and friends. So, the friends want their kids, not only to get into harvard, but also to get a job at blackstone, which recruits one/two kids at harvard every year. Once such a friend's son achieves both harvard and blackstone, this friend will pay back to the first couple: your son n my son both went to harvard, but your son is working for McKinsey, my kid is working for blackstone!! Now the first couple gets pain from this scenario.

The tragedy continues that way, for generations to come.

Great post, raindoctor.

I guess everything depends on goals in life, and what people perceive their purpose to be. I think that really, the ultimate goal in life for anyone is to be happy. Most people see that money has something to do with that. Money obviously does not buy happiness, but it does afford one options. Knowing which options to exercise is the real challenge, and I see many people with heaps of money making choices that only diminish their happiness. With respect to what you said about parents trying to get their kids into HYP schools, it seems like many of them have found them on very convoluted paths to happiness. In fact, it seems like many of them can no longer distinguish between money and happiness, and are blindly assuming that if their child grows up to make tons of money and have big-names on a diploma, that they will be happy. Reality often dictates otherwise.

It can be really irritating to have so many people like that in this area. Looking at the big picture, my personal preference is to have simplicity in life. Sadly, it is difficult to do so with lots of "competitive" people all over here fighting their imaginary status-battles in their attempts to find happiness. I'd like to have a modest house with a nice big garage for wood/metal/car projects, but I just can't justify the cost because of all the people that have gone nuts to leverage themselves into properties around here because of poorly thought-out rationalizations that doing so will bring happiness. That, and they are convinced that such-and-such school district will turn their kid into a millionaire. I really couldn't care less about the school district since, a) my fiancee and I may not have children, and b) if we do, their success in life is ultimately my responsibility and I will see to it that they are well-adjusted, self-sufficient adults when I am through. The number of confidence-less ninnies in this area blows my mind: grow a freaking pair and RAISE your kid into an adult. I wish that more people could understand that just because you get your kids on a path to make money doesn't mean that they won't end up miserable and hating you. The kind of people that you want to impress with school name-drops and paystubs are exactly the people you shouldn't give a flying shit about!

/rant

bmwman91 says

The kind of people that you want to impress with school name-drops and paystubs are exactly the people you shouldn't give a flying shit about!

I'm intrigued by your ideas and would love to subscribe to your newsletter.

Goran_K says

Nail on the head, and this is what Zesta doesn't get, or is refusing to acknowledge even though his OWN KID went to a hyper-competitive, high API school, but only went to UCSB

False. Maybe if you could afford to move out of Benicia you'd improve your reading comprehension.

--

I'll ask again. If your goal is to get into Harvard Law and you can afford to attend both, which school do you choose attend? a hyper-competitive school like Yale? or "hood-university" like UCSB?

bmwman91 says

I really couldn't care less about the school district since, if we do, their success in life is ultimately my responsibility and I will see to it that they are well-adjusted, self-sufficient adults when I am through. The number of confidence-less ninnies in this area blows my mind: grow a freaking pair and RAISE your kid into an adult. I wish that more people could understand that just because you get your kids on a path to make money doesn't mean that they won't end up miserable and hating you.

As a parent all one can do is give your child the tools and opportunity to succeed. If I feel that my child has the passion/ability/desire to be a pro-tennis player, I'm sending them to the IMG tennis academy so they will know what it takes succeed in that field. Obviously the chances of becoming a successful tennis player are virtually nil, even for attendees of the academy, but it would be my goal to at least provide the opportunity.

Likewise, if my child has the aptitude/desire to be successful scholastically, I feel it is an obligation to give them the opportunity to compete and thrive. Perhaps they will find that they don't have what it takes, or find that they don't have the passion to learn all day and if that's the case, I hope they can find it early on and switch to something more appropriate.

I have no intention of home-schooling my kids for a myriad of reasons and given that I will have little control of my kids while they are physically in school I'd like to, to the best of my ability, have them challenged by not only their teachers and curriculum but their peers.

zesta says

I'll ask again. If your goal is to get into Harvard Law and you can afford to attend both, which school do you choose attend? a hyper-competitive school like Yale? or "hood-university" like UCSB?

I think Goran may be correct that there is some complexity here that you miss.

That is, there are schools with large AP programs, that have less attractive API scores, and yet if a student takes a lot of AP courses, and gets fives on most of the AP exams, and high SAT scores, and is ranked at or near the top of his or her class, it won't matter that the API score was less than stellar (due to the diversity at the school in it's non AP and non honors classes).

zesta says

I'll ask again. If your goal is to get into Harvard Law and you can afford to attend both, which school do you choose attend? a hyper-competitive school like Yale? or "hood-university" like UCSB?

Any rational person will choose Yale over UCSB if he is shooting for HLS. But it is one step in the whole puzzle.

1. Go to Yale
2. Select courses that can get maximum gpa (there are consultants in New Haven, CT for that)
3. Pick right volunteerships to show how enthusiatic about helping the downtrodden, how minorities are screwed by the current legal system. Find non-profit legalhelp organiztions for your volunteering
4. Take testmasters LSAT courses when you are a sophomore, and buy old LSAT tests; prepare yourself to get 175 in LSAT
5. When you are a sophomore, look at HLS admission essays and prepare a draft answers.
6. Make sure that 5 and 3 are in sync. What you are doing is to game the system.
7. Of course, one wants to help the downtrodden by getting a JD from HLS. That's the story line in the admission essays. However, the real goal is to become a partner at a top notch law firm. To get here, the best option is to make political connections and become a chief enforcement officer at SEC or US attorney (by using senators). Once you do your stint there for 4 years, you can exit to a lucrative private law firm: that's what revolving door is.

Go to collegeconfidential.com, you can see how kids want this kind of answers!!

BTW, it is hyper-competitive to get into Yale; but getting good grades once you are in Yale is easy. That's another reason why one should go to Stanford, rather than UCB, if one gets admits from both. Stanford faculty knows the game: many wealthy kids go there for sake of degree; so, give them gentle-man grades. At UCB, they don't care about that.

By the way, the UC schools are quite respectable and fairly tough to get in to.

marcus says

I think Goran may be correct that there is some complexity here that you miss.

That is, there are schools with large AP programs, that have less attractive API scores, and yet if a student takes a lot of AP courses, and gets fives on most of the AP exams, and high SAT scores, and is ranked at or near the top of his or her class, it won't matter that the API score was less than stellar (due to the diversity at the school in it's non AP and non honors classes).

Thank you.

Zesta seems to be making it personal now with insults. But I'm glad there are people who got the spirit of what I was trying to convey even if Zesta is purposefully being pig-headed about it.

marcus says

That is, there are schools with large AP programs, that have less attractive API scores, and yet if a student takes a lot of AP courses, and gets fives on most of the AP exams, and high SAT scores, and is ranked at or near the top of his or her class, it won't matter that the API score was less than stellar (due to the diversity at the school in it's non AP and non honors classes).

I obviously agree with this. There are good schools that still offer a number of AP classes and if one excels there, they can get into an excellent university. Universities don't look at AP score.

My point is in general a 900 API school will offer more AP classes than a 800 API school and provide more opportunities to get into an excellent university.

Simply stated if I had a choice between two schools and the only thing I knew about each was the API score, I'd choose the higher one.

Logically to me if one wanted to go to HLS for example, the easiest path would be:
Top Tier Uni -> HLS
similarly if one wanted to go to Top Tier Uni, the easiest path would be:
Top Tier HS -> Top Tier Uni
NOT
Hood HS -> Top Tier Uni

zesta says

False. Maybe if you could afford to move out of Benicia you'd improve your reading comprehension.

--

I'll ask again. If your goal is to get into Harvard Law and you can afford to attend both, which school do you choose attend? a hyper-competitive school like Yale? or "hood-university" like UCSB?

I don't live in Benicia, but I find it funny you would think it was insulting. Benicia is a fine community where people don't pay $500 a sqft for their homes and get excellent schools, and a 30 minute commute to the city. Sounds like a good deal to me.

As for the part of your post that isn't a personal attack, I think Marcus pretty much hit the nail on the head with his response. You're completely missing the point that many others have reiterated. Maybe you should read their post if you mine are making you angry. :)

Goran_K says

I don't live in Benicia, but I find it funny you would think it was insulting. Benicia is a fine community where people don't pay $500 a sqft for their homes and get excellent schools, and a 30 minute commute to the city. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Oh, that comment? that was in response to you insulting someone "ONLY getting into UCSB" - not my kid, just as you don't live in Benicia.

zesta says

Our child wasn't fortunate to get in to the top 20%, among top schools she was accepted were NYU, Carnegie Mellon, never get off of waiting list from Chicago and UC San Diego, and declined from UCLA and UCB. She choose to go to UCSB, she is a honor student, top 1% in her class, and its her 2nd year in school, but she already has a Junior standing. If everything goes well, she will get her bachelor degree in 3 years (not 4), big saving and this time around will most likely have a better chance to get in to the top 10% schools. She is majoring in bio-chemistry by the way, not English….

Your own kid went to a good high school and got rejected from good schools according to your own post. Do you honestly think high API schools are the end all? You can't be that block headed. Your own kid is an example of what I (and many others) have been trying to tell you.

That's not a personal insult, your anecdotal story of your kid happens to match up with what I've been saying.

Goran_K says

zesta says

Our child wasn't fortunate to get in to the top 20%, among top schools she was accepted were NYU, Carnegie Mellon, never get off of waiting list from Chicago and UC San Diego, and declined from UCLA and UCB. She choose to go to UCSB, she is a honor student, top 1% in her class, and its her 2nd year in school, but she already has a Junior standing. If everything goes well, she will get her bachelor degree in 3 years (not 4), big saving and this time around will most likely have a better chance to get in to the top 10% schools. She is majoring in bio-chemistry by the way, not English….

Your own kid went to a good high school and got rejected from good schools according to your own post. Do you honestly think high API schools are the end all? You can't be that daft.

where did you get that quote from? I didn't write that.

it was mine :)

I blame it on the quote link. :)

btw, zhanka, I don't think UCSB is a bad school, but I think it proves my point about high API schools not being the end all to getting into top universities.

zesta says

Simply stated if I had a choice between two schools and the only thing I knew about each was the API score, I'd choose the higher one.

True. But nobody would argue that. The point is that you can know a lot more about a school than it's API.

I'm in favor of there being more schools that are diverse, socioeconomically and academically, even while there is sufficient "tracking" to support the strongest students in reaching their goals. It's known that this is what's best for lower socioeconomic students.

If all schools are (relatively) academically homogeneous, then we never solve the problem of low performing schools. Low achieving students need to be able to look around and see what success looks like.

I know I changed the subject a little and I'm coming at this from a teacher's perspective rather than a parent's.

If all you know about a school is the "API", then you're definitely not doing the proper research for what makes a school a great learning environment for kids.

That's about as lazy as thinking the fastest car around the track is the one with the most HP.

Goran_K says

If all you know about a school is the "API", then you're definitely not doing the proper research for what makes a school a great learning environment for kids.

That's about as lazy as thinking the fastest car around the track is the one with the most HP.

ok... money not being a factor, which BA high school would you suggest a child attend if their eventual goal was HYP?

SFace says

You think the Palo Alto, Cupertino buyers, the most educated in the world got it all wrong?

Statistics without informed context are usually worthless, easily manipulated and often misleading.

Given how they overpaid for their homes yes I do. And its only a passthrough cost if they can find a fool greater than themselves. Otherwise its simply a cost. An expensive cost.

One factor that dosen't seem to have been covered here are the costs of college. Tuition, housing, etc arent chump change especially when discussing HYP. What good is going through all the trouble of getting your kid into HYP if s/he can't afford to it?

marcus says

True. But nobody would argue that. The point is that you can know a lot more about a school than it's API.

API's aren't the end of all high school rankings, I realize that. There are a number of schools that I believe aren't diverse enough (which is important to me) and despite a lofty API ranking wouldn't be my primary choice of school. However there is a definite correlation between High School API #'s and college attendance rate.

My point of contention is the Goran's opinion that putting a kid in an "overcrowded hood high school" will allow the kid to stand out while putting the same kid in "top-tier" high school will get them lost in the crowd thus negatively affecting their college choices.

Goran_K says

You could be #245 out of 800 in the 2012 class of Top High School USA, admissions officers don't care. If you're #5 out of #1500 at Over Crowded Hood High School, then they do care.

My point is that a kid sent to a school where 85% of the kids go to college will perform better academically than a kid that goes to school where the graduation rate is 50%.

zesta says

Goran_K says

If all you know about a school is the "API", then you're definitely not doing the proper research for what makes a school a great learning environment for kids.

That's about as lazy as thinking the fastest car around the track is the one with the most HP.

ok... money not being a factor, which BA high school would you suggest a child attend if their eventual goal was HYP?

lol...if that was the case...

Harker, Bellarmine, Mitty or Saint Francis. If money is not an issue, public schools are not even on the radar. I went to Bellarmine (when it was significantly more affordable) and I will tell you that it is a HYP mill. They push the well-roundedness and community service angle hard, and have seniors take a mandatory college guidance class where they hold your hand through the entire admissions process. If you have one kid, it is more economical to go that route than pay for a house in a high API district where your kid will just get turned into a test-taking drone. With two kids you roughly break even, and with three it gets expensive these days.

zesta says

ok... money not being a factor, which BA high school would you suggest a child attend if their eventual goal was HYP?

Like bmwman91 said, go Private. Places like Head Royce in Oakland, or the schools mentioned by bmwman91 will get much better results than "Cupertino High". They are allowed more leeway in customizing their program for a more attractive student for admission to top universities. More resources overall than any public school. For the most part, the education program at public schools is dictated and "standardized" by the Chief Superintendent of Public Instruction and his staff. It's meant to meet STAR and CAHSEE standards. In effect, they are targeting and cultivating a program to beat a test benchmark. Does that sound like a program meant to create well rounded student? High API schools are especially good at indoctrinating students to this standard. Sure a few bright spots may escape the artificially imposed doldrums, but for the most part, you build great test takers.

This is anecdotal, but during my years at Wharton, I never met more than 1-2 people who were actually raised in the Bay Area, or anyone that was from a fortress city.

IMO, high API public schools build great drones, but poor leaders.

New Renter says

One factor that dosen't seem to have been covered here are the costs of college. Tuition, housing, etc arent chump change especially when discussing HYP. What good is going through all the trouble of getting your kid into HYP if s/he can't afford to it?

Actually, HYP, MIT, and S are more generous than tier-2 ivys when it comes to aid. If the parents can't afford, the admit will get a full ride (through private grants, etc).

Likewise, Tier-2 ivys are more generous than Devry/ITT :-)

zesta says

money not being a factor, which BA high school would you suggest a child attend if their eventual goal was HYP?

Even though BA private schools send more kids to HYP than public ones, don't hold your hopes too high for HYP. The surest way to get to HYP is to become ultra-rich, like someone who made $100M from a startup; then you can get in that HYP club. The causation is other way: ultra wealthy usually send their kids to private schools, and they don't send their kids to public schools. So, many kids from these private schools end up at HYP, not so much because of the school they went to, but because of their parents' background. East coast prep schools follow the same process when it comes to their admissions: select kids from the elite.

For the upper middle class (like kids of somone who makes $1M a year), they can hire a consultant from Ivywise.com and pay $30K when the kid is in junior high. This consultant can tell you how to game the system.

It is easy to get into tier-2 Ivys from BA private schools, though.

When people say HYP, it is just HYP, not the other 5.
Tier 1 Ivy: HYP
Tier 2 Ivy: Columbia, Penn
Tier 2.5 Ivy: Dart (since this can be part of 2 or 3, depending on who you ask)
Tier 3 Ivy: Cornell, Brown

Penn State = poor man's Penn:)

Same with the UC system
1: B, LA, SD
2: SB, Davis, Irvine
3. Riverside, Santa Cruz, Merced

raindoctor says

The surest way to get to HYP is to become ultra-rich, like someone who made $100M from a startup; then you can get in that HYP club.

With a trust fund of $100M why bother with college at all?

New Renter says

With a trust fund of $100M why bother with college at all?

Maybe, to meet kids of billionaires or powerful politicians, so that one can turn that $100M into $1B. And the middle class folks go there to join the upper middle class. The upper middle class go there to keep the dough coming.

why the ultra wealthy kids go to prep schools rather than to public schools? Just to avoid proles/commoners

Some ultra wealthy kids go there to just get a degree. I know of someone whose dad donated $5M to Stanford, and she got a Ph.D in some humanities department (which I don't want to disclose) for nothing. The dissertation committe members were told not bother the candidate, and were asked to approve the thesis.

raindoctor says

Maybe, to meet kids of billionaires or powerful politicians, so that one can turn that $100M into $1B.

So join a political campaign, set up fundraisers, buy a dressage horse, whatever. There are lots of ways a wealthy person can meet wealthier people without the HYP.

New Renter says

So join a political campaign, set up fundraisers, buy a dressage horse, whatever. There are lots of ways a wealthy person can meet wealthier people without the HYP.

Sure. But the ultra wealthy parents want their kids to get 4 years college education. If they go to UCB, they end up getting flunked. If they go to any private school (like southern elite going to SMU), the faculty gives them gentleman b grades for nothing. And HYP is happy to admit such kids.

Just like Cupertino parents, who don't want their kids to mingle with other kids like in Mendota/Gilroy high school, the wealthy parents pick their options. Once they graduate, they can do whatever they want: horse races; campaigns; etc

So, let's make sure I have your logic straight.

Ultra-selective & expensive private schools are best to get into a top university. But a top-tier public school is worse than a "hood high" because
Goran_K says

going to a hyper-competitive school can actually hurt an applicants case because it's so much harder to bubble to the top, where if they had gone to a slightly less competitive school, they would have been in the Top 5%

Goran_K says

IMO, high API public schools build great drones, but poor leaders.

and I'm led to assume you believe that hood-high builds greater leaders than high API schools?

--

Logic tells me that the chances of a kid attending university increases
hood public HS - good public HS - top-tier public - top-tier private

Now, people might pick one which they believe is the best "value" all other things being equal.

-If money is of absolutely no concern, than top tier private.
-Someone else might believe that since RE costs can be "passed thru" the top-tier public is the best value
-Someone else might believe all that's necessary is to "grow a pair" and RAISE kids and are indifferent to the difference in schools.

raindoctor says

New Renter says

So join a political campaign, set up fundraisers, buy a dressage horse, whatever. There are lots of ways a wealthy person can meet wealthier people without the HYP.

Sure. But the ultra wealthy parents want their kids to get 4 years college education. If they go to UCB, they end up getting flunked. If they go to any private school (like southern elite going to SMU), the faculty gives them gentleman b grades for nothing. And HYP is happy to admit such kids.

Just like Cupertino parents, who don't want their kids to mingle with other kids like in Mendota/Gilroy high school, the wealthy parents pick their options. Once they graduate, they can do whatever they want: horse races; campaigns; etc

Wanna secure your future? Become a locksmith!

So the uberwealthy want their kids to get an education and pay exhorberant rates for HYP with the understanding if their kids suck they will be assured passing grades.

Something here isn't adding up.

BTW the not so uberwealthy can get a similar deal at any school of choice. A fat donation (but still less than 4 years at HYP) will swing the same understanding.

New Renter says

So the uberwealthy want their kids to get an education and pay exhorberant rates for HYP with the understanding if their kids suck they will be assured passing grades.

HYP want the uberwealthy kids as their alumni, not so much for their fees, but to continue the elitist status. Of course, the uberwealthy can donate $50M just like that to HYP, unlike the plastic surgeon parents, who make $2M a year. So, the plastic surgeon parents play a different game for their kids to get into HYP: sending to best prep schools, sending kids to Africa for some non-profit work, etc.

HYP keep 'unofficial' recruiting officials, whose sole purpose is to bring in the kids of billionaires to their schools, just like the way they do in sports recruiting. This recruiting helps them on two fronts: fat donations; elitist status. This is another reason why they put a cap on the number of Asian/Indian kids they can admit. The said recruiting officials go to elite prep schools like Phillips academy and look for the kids of the uberwealthy, and beg them to join their schools; a typical Cupertino parent thinks that going to east coast prep schools help them secure a spot in HYP. It does not work that way.

Sure, the uberwealthy can send their kids to Humboldt state university, or Portland State or Fresno State. It is like asking a billionaire whether he can afford a Ferrari or Honda Civic.

In general, private schools, unlike public ones, don't give F grades. This is true even for Notre Dame de Namur University, Belmont and for Menlo College. However, instructors at UCB are ruthless when it comes to grading!! If you go to a private school, however low ranked it might be, you will be guaranteed to graduate;it is not the case in public schools.

zesta says

and I'm led to assume you believe that hood-high builds greater leaders than high API schools?

I'm not saying Hood High builds better leaders, you're combining two different points into one, so the comparison loses meaning. What I'm saying on that particular point is that the difference between paying $250 a sqft more for a house for Cupertino High because it's in the CUSD, doesn't make sense over Dublin High, or Benicia or any other school where housing is MUCH cheaper, and the difference in API score is 30-50 points. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, UPenn etc, don't even see the API score of the freshman applicants because that's not the criteria they use to admit freshmen.

To go even further, my main point, and what we're really talking about here is an educational and instructional approach. For that, you can't go simply by API score, parents need to do their research on what the school offers,and how their programs help kids become better students, and innovators. This (and all the intricacies within) are what top tier schools use to admit students. So in THEORY, someone from 850 API HIGH could have a much better chance than someone from 950 API HIGH. You just need to do the research.

Like I said before, judging a school "top tier" just because it has a high API score is as lazy as saying the car with the highest HP will lap the fastest lap.

zhanka says

I don't see my other one is motivated as the first one and only explanation I see is the school.

Really? You don't think there's any chance your kids could like, be two different people?

I graduated from UCSD having transferred there from community college. I had absolutely no means of going it any other way but isn't sending your kids to all the best schools (and paying for it) pretty risky when the only real advantage is some good ol' boy connections they MIGHT make? Otherwise, having a STEM degree from a state school seems to yield about the same results.

You're right, they are different. However, before we moved the second child to a different school (same city), her grades were always better than the first one. Not anymore. Can't say it any better than this:
zhanka says

Kids personalities are defined by those they hang around with.

I have other examples, 3 different families (our friends) decided to move their kids from private schools to a good public schools (Los Gatos and Cupertino), all those kids were doing good before, now 2 kids are failing HS and have some other issues, other one is just not doing as good as he did in Harker.

The rout you took thru community collegeI is fine for kids I will quote myself:
zhanka says

For those of you who has kids who know what they want and how to get it, it doesn't matter what school they are going, but for all other it does make a difference.