R.I.P. MIAA "A" Conference Championship

[GREYHOUND ALUM]

I get what you are saying. 98-100% of the kids at all of the MIAA "A" schools attend college immediately following graduation. Like I said, making claims about 'all' or 'never' usually just turn out to be false because it is such a bold claim. I agree that parents send their kids to schools like this so they can continue their education that is one of the biggest benefits of the private school education in my opinion: the focus those schools have in getting kids into college.

100% of Gilman kids qualify for college. They would be asked to leave school before senior year if they weren't on pace to qualify. Those that attend Prep schools do for other reasons, not because they didn't qualify to attend a university.

But my statement was in direct response to other supposed "football factories," not in comparison to all privates.

[Outside Looking In]

100% of Gilman kids qualify for college. They would be asked to leave school before senior year if they weren't on pace to qualify. Those that attend Prep schools do for other reasons, not because they didn't qualify to attend a university.

But my statement was in direct response to other supposed "football factories," not in comparison to all privates.

I think it is great that kids from Gilman qualify for college, but let's be honest qualifying for college is not that hard. Now qualiyfying for the top schools is diffilcult but most colleges are not. And also Gilman has very involved parents in their student's lives. That is a big factor. I would hope that all the students their qualify, but it is not that big of an accomplishment when you get the best kids academically as well as athletically.

Correct me if I am wrong isnt there a stringent test that potential students have to take to get in? So Gilman hand picks the top scorers.

[eaglesinsider]

Correct me if I am wrong isnt there a stringent test that potential students have to take to get in? So Gilman hand picks the top scorers.

It's called the ISEE (Independent Schools Entrance Exam), it costs about $100, is administered about 3-4 times a year at various test sites, and most of the top prep schools in the nation use it. It is the equivalent of the SAT (but harder relative to the student's education level IMO) i.e. a test whose scores are required as part of a complete application and a good score on the ISEE helps but doesn't mean automatic admission and a bad score hurts but doesn't mean automatic rejection.

[pmore108]

100% of Gilman kids qualify for college. They would be asked to leave school before senior year if they weren't on pace to qualify. Those that attend Prep schools do for other reasons, not because they didn't qualify to attend a university.

But my statement was in direct response to other supposed "football factories," not in comparison to all privates.

I get what you are saying and understand the context in which you said it, I just don't like when people deal in absolutes. Also, it stands to reason that all graduates will be college qualified if you separate the ones who wouldn't qualify from the school.

[fylde5]

There you go again! chiming in and wrong again! You might want to read what I wrote and what the person wrote I was responding to. I NEVER SAID THAT GILMAN IS THE ONLY SCHOOL THAT SENDS ALL THEIR ATHLETES TO COLLEGE! If you can show me where I said that, I will never post again on here, since you wanted to join the peanut gallery, if you can't find where I said that, will you never post again? I will help you, I said that Gilman in comparison to ECA, DM and Good Counsel has all their ATHLETES QUALIFY FOR COLLEGE.

I suggest you sit back and continue to be silent because you're making yourself look stupid by aligning yourself with the idiots. Oldtime realized that I didn't say this and he's the one that initially made the comment but he was smart enough not to continue to press an issue that he realized that he was wrong about. I guess seeing and comprehending is hard to do at your age!

Yes, I guess my age should give me some leway with regard to my memory, but a young wippersnapper like you should have no problem at all. We have been down this road many times and as in the past my only issue has been your insistance in speaking in absolutes, like saying this is the best class ever at Gilman or he is going to be the best ever at Gilman. Which by association means the best ever at any school because of course Gilman is the best. This theme seems to be annual now.

[GREYHOUND ALUM]

Yes, I guess my age should give me some leway with regard to my memory, but a young wippersnapper like you should have no problem at all. We have been down this road many times and as in the past my only issue has been your insistance in speaking in absolutes, like saying this is the best class ever at Gilman or he is going to be the best ever at Gilman. Which by association means the best ever at any school because of course Gilman is the best. This theme seems to be annual now.

Those are merely my OPINION which can be taken however anyone wants. Anytime anybody makes those sort of statements, it's just their personal opinion. Gilman qualifying 100% of their graduating athletes are FACTS. This isn't an opinion of mine.

By the way, I'm pretty sure that Loyola also qualifies 100% of their graduating athletes as other MIAA schools.

[Outside Looking In]

Those are merely my OPINION which can be taken however anyone wants. Anytime anybody makes those sort of statements, it's just their personal opinion. Gilman qualifying 100% of their graduating athletes are FACTS. This isn't an opinion of mine.

By the way, I'm pretty sure that Loyola also qualifies 100% of their graduating athletes as other MIAA schools.

I agree. The MIAA schools are usually top notch schools, but the likes of Gilman, McD, Loyola etc get very motivated kids with very motivated parents. Parental involvement is key especially when parents are kicking out that kind of money. These schools dont let in slackers, thugs, trouble makers, etc as the average public school does. So of course the qualification for college is going to be high. Like I said, qualifying for college is not that tough to begin with, couple that with parental involvement and you have 99% that qualify. But I applaud these schools and would send my kids there, but like earlier posters said, you just go overboard with these overzealous statements all the time.

[Big Sky]

I agree. The MIAA schools are usually top notch schools, but the likes of Gilman, McD, Loyola etc get very motivated kids with very motivated parents. Parental involvement is key especially when parents are kicking out that kind of money. These schools dont let in slackers, thugs, trouble makers, etc as the average public school does. So of course the qualification for college is going to be high. Like I said, qualifying for college is not that tough to begin with, couple that with parental involvement and you have 99% that qualify. But I applaud these schools and would send my kids there, but like earlier posters said, you just go overboard with these overzealous statements all the time.

Please, These schools have the same problems with kids that every other school has, If not more. Money is the biggest enabler there is, The parents that pay for schools like these, work a lot of hours for that luxory, the more they work the more freedom kids have. More freedom more trouble just the way kids are.Yes these schools as well as all schools, have some really great kids as well.Great kids are not about Money,Having it or not. It is about the parents and the community and how these kids have been paid attention to. I never like putting kids up for examples but in this case I will. I met student Athlete's and there father's from Gilman, they were all Studs,There father's were great men,it was easy to see why their son's were great kids.(Actually this fits several Family's from Gilman I met) There Boys play or will play at VA,MD,AL.MI I also met some parents at CHC that fit the same profile Great kids and great parents, They will play Lacrosse and,or Football at NC, PennState,ND,Towson. Although all these parents are from different social levels. The things they had in common , Great parents,involved in their kids life,Sons were all great students,They were all top athletes and leaders of there teams.They were also driven by their faith.To this end,Great parents and Faith cannot be beat.Not the letter on your jacket

[Outside Looking In]

Please, These schools have the same problems with kids that every other school has, If not more. Money is the biggest enabler there is, The parents that pay for schools like these, work a lot of hours for that luxory, the more they work the more freedom kids have. More freedom more trouble just the way kids are.Yes these schools as well as all schools, have some really great kids as well.Great kids are not about Money,Having it or not. It is about the parents and the community and how these kids have been paid attention to. I never like putting kids up for examples but in this case I will. I met student Athlete's and there father's from Gilman, they were all Studs,There father's were great men,it was easy to see why their son's were great kids.(Actually this fits several Family's from Gilman I met) There Boys play or will play at VA,MD,AL.MI I also met some parents at CHC that fit the same profile Great kids and great parents, They will play Lacrosse and,or Football at NC, PennState,ND,Towson. Although all these parents are from different social levels. The things they had in common , Great parents,involved in their kids life,Sons were all great students,They were all top athletes and leaders of there teams.They were also driven by their faith.To this end,Great parents and Faith cannot be beat.Not the letter on your jacket

Big, you just made my point in the last part of your post. Parental involvement is the biggest component. It doesnt matter what social level they come from as long as the parents are a part of their lives than that is more than half the battle.

But I do have to disagree with you if you think Gilman, CHC , Loyola etc has the same types of problems that Patterson, Landsdowne, Woodlawn, etc deal with. That is nonsense.

[fylde5]

Those are merely my OPINION which can be taken however anyone wants. Anytime anybody makes those sort of statements, it's just their personal opinion. Gilman qualifying 100% of their graduating athletes are FACTS. This isn't an opinion of mine.

By the way, I'm pretty sure that Loyola also qualifies 100% of their graduating athletes as other MIAA schools.

GA, I have no problem with opinions, even yours. In fact that is what this forum is mostly about. My problem is "opinions stated as fact" which yours frequently are. I won't beat a dead horse anymore and will let it go now. Not attacking just constructive critisism.

I don't know what kind of law you practice, but I would have to guess you are a trial attorney with your ability to sell a story.

[pmore108]

The biggest difference I have seen with private vs public schools (this is using my anecdotal, personal experience so it is by no means scientific) is that in a school like chc, loyola, gilman, etc. the focus is 100% on getting you to college, I can't say that for public schools.

My mother has custody of a cousin of mine (16 yrs old, attends a good high school in harford county that sends a majority of kids onto college) and his experience is completely different than mine was at chc. I consider us equals with regard to intelligence (i.e. he has the same ability I had at the same age) however his upbringing was difficult so that has hindered him and created some bad habits we have worked hard to break. He is above average as a student who started high school with some bad habits. I don't see that his school has pushed him to maximize his potential, that push has come mostly from the home (i.e. my mother mostly, my brother and myself as much as we can) and seeing his peers/friends who are successful in school.

At chc I was pushed from home ("I'm paying for this and I didn't raise you to be stupid") and at school ("our goal is college preparation" "this will help you in college" "we are sending kids to x,y,z"). I had bad habits and they were broken both at home and school when they affected my grades. My brother, who was a much better student than myself, credits going to chc with getting him into the college of his choice. His claim is that had he gone to our district school he would not have gone where he did to college due to the lack of "push".

In my opinion, good/great public schools are good/great because of a few factors:

-Parental involvement, having a large amount of two parent households helps too.

-the area doesn't have to be affluent but it helps to have some affluent families in the area.

-students who are good students already (i.e. prepared well for school by their parents/elementary school).

-A community that is involved in it's local government.

What I have seen (via my cousin's experience and talking with other parents at his school) is that the public school will not make the average/slightly above average kid any better or prepared for college. It will use the well above average/high achiever kid to boost numbers but won't improve them much over four years. The low achiever/below average kids will get passed through the system. The largest difference is that the public school has to accept who comes through the doors with any problems they have. However, I think the public schools do not focus enough on college preparation for everyone.

[Outside Looking In]

The biggest difference I have seen with private vs public schools (this is using my anecdotal, personal experience so it is by no means scientific) is that in a school like chc, loyola, gilman, etc. the focus is 100% on getting you to college, I can't say that for public schools.

My mother has custody of a cousin of mine (16 yrs old, attends a good high school in harford county that sends a majority of kids onto college) and his experience is completely different than mine was at chc. I consider us equals with regard to intelligence (i.e. he has the same ability I had at the same age) however his upbringing was difficult so that has hindered him and created some bad habits we have worked hard to break. He is above average as a student who started high school with some bad habits. I don't see that his school has pushed him to maximize his potential, that push has come mostly from the home (i.e. my mother mostly, my brother and myself as much as we can) and seeing his peers/friends who are successful in school.

At chc I was pushed from home ("I'm paying for this and I didn't raise you to be stupid") and at school ("our goal is college preparation" "this will help you in college" "we are sending kids to x,y,z"). I had bad habits and they were broken both at home and school when they affected my grades. My brother, who was a much better student than myself, credits going to chc with getting him into the college of his choice. His claim is that had he gone to our district school he would not have gone where he did to college due to the lack of "push".

In my opinion, good/great public schools are good/great because of a few factors:

-Parental involvement, having a large amount of two parent households helps too.

-the area doesn't have to be affluent but it helps to have some affluent families in the area.

-students who are good students already (i.e. prepared well for school by their parents/elementary school).

-A community that is involved in it's local government.

What I have seen (via my cousin's experience and talking with other parents at his school) is that the public school will not make the average/slightly above average kid any better or prepared for college. It will use the well above average/high achiever kid to boost numbers but won't improve them much over four years. The low achiever/below average kids will get passed through the system. The largest difference is that the public school has to accept who comes through the doors with any problems they have. However, I think the public schools do not focus enough on college preparation for everyone.

I agree 100%. Could not have said it better. To say that Privates like Gilman and CHC have the same problems as some publics is nonsense.

[pmore108]

I think what big sky was getting at is that some problems can be just as prevalent at privates as publics if not more so. In my opinion and experience these problems were (in no order): drug use (mostly weed), underage drinking (really big), sex (some people don't consider this a problem per se, whole other debate), cheating in school, etc. During my time there were some really stupid things that happened (St. Paul's lax team scandal). Also, I know kids from all of these private schools that turned out to be goof offs in college or have substance abuse problems down the road, get DUIs, kill themselves drinking and driving, etc. In that sense all schools are the same but there is definitely some baggage that public schools have to deal with that private schools never will.

[Outside Looking In]

I think what big sky was getting at is that some problems can be just as prevalent at privates as publics if not more so. In my opinion and experience these problems were (in no order): drug use (mostly weed), underage drinking (really big), sex (some people don't consider this a problem per se, whole other debate), cheating in school, etc. During my time there were some really stupid things that happened (St. Paul's lax team scandal). Also, I know kids from all of these private schools that turned out to be goof offs in college or have substance abuse problems down the road, get DUIs, kill themselves drinking and driving, etc. In that sense all schools are the same but there is definitely some baggage that public schools have to deal with that private schools never will.

No doubt. I agree. But I took it as schools like Gilman and CHC still get their kids to qualify even with the problems of normal schools. That is not accurate. Also if a kid goofs off in a private they can be kicked out, in a public school this does not happen.

[harcohorns]

So let me get this straight... Private Schools (like Gilman) boast 100% graduation and 100% college acceptance.. yet they will kick out kids not on track for college acceptance (per GA), or that cant stay up to par academically, or that have behaviour issues etc... So they pretty much self-insure a 100% rate correct?

On the other hand public school grad rates and college acceptance rates includes all kids that went there even drop outs, fail outs and kids expelled for behavioral issues...

SO this begs the question why is it when kids in public schools drop out or fail out people blame the school system and the syatem failed them but when a kid fails out or is asked to leave a private its the kids fault and the school gets to keep their 100% rate? Didn't the private school fail them in the same way as a public school does? Maybe even more so in my opinion... after all they admitted the kid based on testing and certain criteria and still failed.. The public school has to take all kids...

This seems like a double standard to me and in my opinion the private school grad rates and college acceptance rates should include all kids that were ever enrolled there?

Anyone else agree with me here?

[Outside Looking In]

So let me get this straight... Private Schools (like Gilman) boast 100% graduation and 100% college acceptance.. yet they will kick out kids not on track for college acceptance (per GA), or that cant stay up to par academically, or that have behaviour issues etc... So they pretty much self-insure a 100% rate correct?

On the other hand public school grad rates and college acceptance rates includes all kids that went there even drop outs, fail outs and kids expelled for behavioral issues...

SO this begs the question why is it when kids in public schools drop out or fail out people blame the school system and the syatem failed them but when a kid fails out or is asked to leave a private its the kids fault and the school gets to keep their 100% rate? Didn't the private school fail them in the same way as a public school does? Maybe even more so in my opinion... after all they admitted the kid based on testing and certain criteria and still failed.. The public school has to take all kids...

This seems like a double standard to me and in my opinion the private school grad rates and college acceptance rates should include all kids that were ever enrolled there?

Anyone else agree with me here?

Exactly!

[eaglesinsider]

Considering I can count on one hand the number of kids who are asked to leave McDonogh in a year, all because of disciplinary issues and every single one of them on track to graduate, I think their 100% graduation/college acceptance rate is accurate. The trick is identifying kids who can't cut the work academically before letting them in the door through a series of tests and interviews, no different than any college.

Once you're in, you're in. If you get into academic trouble they will help you until you bring your grades up. I don't know how other schools do it, but I know with 100% certainty that that is how McDonogh does it.

[aacountyfootball]

Another advantage that many non-catholic private schools have is that many of them have a practice of sending kids to pre-first or "reclassifying" them before they get to high school, so a large number of their seniors are, on average, a year older than their peer group in public schools.

This is a good business model to get an extra year of tuition and a good way to get better test scores and academic/athletic success. It can be a huge advantage to most kids that do it. But, this is not the norm in public schools so we are really not comparing apples vs. apples.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter once you get to college because you can't leverage maturity/age or home situation in college and your success is determined by your talent and how hard you work because you are on your own.

[GREYHOUND ALUM]

So let me get this straight... Private Schools (like Gilman) boast 100% graduation and 100% college acceptance.. yet they will kick out kids not on track for college acceptance (per GA), or that cant stay up to par academically, or that have behaviour issues etc... So they pretty much self-insure a 100% rate correct?

On the other hand public school grad rates and college acceptance rates includes all kids that went there even drop outs, fail outs and kids expelled for behavioral issues...

SO this begs the question why is it when kids in public schools drop out or fail out people blame the school system and the syatem failed them but when a kid fails out or is asked to leave a private its the kids fault and the school gets to keep their 100% rate? Didn't the private school fail them in the same way as a public school does? Maybe even more so in my opinion... after all they admitted the kid based on testing and certain criteria and still failed.. The public school has to take all kids...

This seems like a double standard to me and in my opinion the private school grad rates and college acceptance rates should include all kids that were ever enrolled there?

Anyone else agree with me here?

Gilman's standards are very high. My point of saying that they would ask you to leave before senior year if you're not on pace to qualify was in response to the question of having all kids qualify. The truth is, the kids that are let go are not up to GILMAN'S standards. They still would qualify for college. At Gilman it's not just good enough to get a 70. You can actually have all passing grades and be put on academic probation. Kind of like in most Law schools you have to keep a B average or you are asked to leave. So your assumption is very misinformed.

Like Insider said, Gilman like McDonogh does a great job at identifying students before they're accepted. Which is why I always say that Gilman can't just hand pick players. Gilman also has vast resources to help kids once they're let in school. They don't just throw kids out once they are in, it easier to be let go from Gilman now than when I was there. But it still takes a whole lot to be asked to leave.

[harcohorns]

I wasn't making any assumptions or trying to make a point.. I was just simply posing a question to the forum for debate..

Obviously I weighed the pros and cons and made a decision to send my kids to private school but I also know that is what worked for us.. I also know for many folks public is the best choice so I would never pander or try and convince someone one is better than the other..

I also agree with AACounty that ultimately its up the individual kid and what they make of their opportunities.. All we can do as parents or educators is get them there it is up to them what they do when there..

I also know there are many ways to get there and it really doesn't matter what high school or socio-economic background or athletic prowess your kid has or is from if your kid is self motivated enough and sets his or her goals on getting to college there's tons of ways to get money , pell grants , all kinds of scholarships, loans heck if all else fails they can join the National Guard and give up 1 weekend a month and get money for school...