May 17, 2010
Volume 107, Issue 3
The Students Speak Reaccreditation By Kelly McNeil Editor-In-Chief
The Holy Trinity, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, reign as the “crème de la crème” around the world
The Big Three: Why? [INSERT TEXT HERE] By Zoey Erdenebileg
field hockey photo by charles garrettson; football photo by ryan erenstein/staff; textbook photo by ryan erenstein/staff
Executive Editor It is well known that in the past, Hill has been generally regarded as an especially W.A.S.P-y (White, Anglo– Saxon and Protestant) school. To get into Hill, you had to be from a certain social class (the top one) and make a certain amount of money (a lot). Boys aiming to become leaders of the future and continue the legacy of their family came here and easily carried on to Harvard, Yale or Princeton: it was just the next step. For them, it was a question of “Which one should I pick?” These days, for Hill students, it seems to be an issue of “Why didn’t I get in?” Trivia Fact: the Sixth Form class of 1910 had 2 students matriculate to Harvard, 22 to Yale and 12 to Princeton. The ne’er do wells attended Williams, Amherst, Cornell, M.I.T and Dartmouth. Fast forward to 2010, where we had one acceptance from Harvard and one acceptance from Princeton – and it happened to be the same guy. No love from Yale, fourth year in a row. This small turnout for the Big Three has a lot of the concerned underformers, parents and especially the Board of Trustees posing the question – “Why not?” The answer is complicated, multilayered and has as much to do with the various nuances of social change as anything else. 1910 was a different time from 2010. First of all, there were less people applying to and attending colleges. Col-
lege was a luxury for the select few who were either smart enough or rich enough or both. Average American high school graduates could make a living off of their high school diplomas. In the 2010 job market, a college degree is a necessity for most occupations. With the specialization of occupations, and the skills needed to operate a technology driven world, education is essential for a comfortable life. Moreover, the Baby Boomers of the post World War II era have added to the competition, driving acceptance rates down to abysmal percentages. Of course, the increasing need for higher education is a social occurrence, a happening that Hill cannot affect or help. Hothe Sixth Form class of 1910 had 2 students matriculate to Harvard, 22 to Yale and 12 to Princeton. Grade point averages edge closer to 4.0 and the S.A.T. (a test supposed to equalize millions of high school seniors) becomes ever more futile. As students enhance, colleges are looking at other parts of the application more seriously. Harvard, Yale and Princeton want good grades and impressive S.A.T scores; that will always be true, but
now a student must possess more. The Harvard University website quotes, “There is no formula for gaining admission…Students with vastly different credentials come from thousands of secondary schools across the country and around the world. What unifies our students are the talents they bring to Harvard and the passion to explore its vast resources.” An obscure “talent” or an extraordinary “passion”, they claim is the key. A retired Yale University admissions officer who was willing to shed some light on the subject remembered, “For me, what always made a candidate stand out were his or her extracurricular activities. We got many students with 4.0 GPAs and fantastic SAT and AP scores, but in a sea of kids like that, it’s what else they do that makes them interesting.” Many Hill students divulge that their interest in attending a boarding school was to challenge themselves and to get into the best colleges. While it is true that a Hill education will test you, it may not hold as true for college acceptances. The Yale source revealed that “…I never paid much attention to what type of school an applicant went to when I reviewed applications. See College on page 3
Comparing Numbers 1910 Harvard 2 Yale 22 Princeton 12
2010 0 0 1
Reaccreditation descended upon Hill in a flurry of emails, visitors, and harmless bemusement on the part of most students. Once students were more informed about some of the issues the school had tried to improve upon in the past and were trying to improve on now, students couldn’t stop talking. Reaccreditation topics were the subject of dorm and lunch table discussion, and the students the Hill News interviewed expressed some very strong opinions on what they think about the topics, past and present, and what they think could be done to improve. So, in simplified terms, here’s what select members of the student body (all anonymous, due to some rather scathing criticism) think about “plans for growth and improvement.” Point One: Improved Academic Achievement “I mean, you’re always going to have slackers in the classroom, but in the push to improve I think the smart kids seem to be getting the brunt of the pressure, not the people who need it,” says one 5th form boy in honors English. “I feel like saying ‘we want our students to get better grades’ is almost a cop out. It takes attention away from other more important improvements that could be made.” Another 5th former agreed with his sentiment: “I think a lot of things are wrong with this school, but none of the things they said they want to improve are the things that are really wrong. ‘Academic achievement?’ Really? I’m actually kinda disappointed.” “Academic performance?” spouts an even more disgruntled 6th former. “Something has been done to improve that? People seem to have more work and less free time, and in turn a lot more stress. More of my friends (both upperclassmen and lowerclassmen) have been mentally breaking down this year than I can remember. They don’t seem to be helping us except for giving us more work.” See CAmpus on page 3