The Official New England Ice Hockey DBoard
Click Here to Visit Our Facebook Page
Winning may help school spirit and going to a game may give the kids something fun to do but that is the case without a high level of hockey. If prep hockey was played at the level of division 3 mass hockey the kids would still enjoy rooting for their classmates at a game. My son plays on a better than average ISL team and I can tell you very few really care other than the players and their parents. I am not saying this as a knock on the school but it just makes me wonder why schools award money to top players when a hundred point rise in their average sat scores would do more to draw kids to the school than a high level hockey team.
It is really all about developing the school community culture. My son is a recent grad of a Keller division school and played hockey there for 4 years (3V, 1JV). The first thing I noticed about the school, and it was what attracted me most to the boarding school opportunity was the culture. The entire school community - students, faculty, admin, staff, and everyone else respected achievement. High levels of achievement in academics, arts, and athletics were all considered "cool".
At the local public school in New York, "cool" was cutting class, sagging your pants, and mouthing off to authority. Huge difference at prep schools.
A big part of this culture is the high level of proficiency at the sports the school competes in. For schools with 100 kids per grade, it is truly remarkable the level of competition maintained by the ISL schools in so many sports.
This culture is immediately recognizable by a certain group of target parents and it is like catnip to them. Completely irresistible. The schools clearly understand this and recognize the marketing value is priceless.
OP here. Thats a very god explanation. I can absolutely see that.
Depends on the academic standards of the school. SSAT is very important in validating or exposing the elementary school grades. But it's only one metric. Grades/SSAT/Athletics/Extracurricular/Financial/Demographics all weigh on wheither or not the school want's your kid.
Yes, indisputable that the interview is more important than grades/money etc. Like they all expect a middle school kid to be a polished interviewer. And of course teachers that are asked to write letters of recomendation don't say all flowery things about the kid. Dope.
Correction. U16 better than D-1 public. U18 better than CC and most privates.
Oh ok so teachers writing comments is not a letter of recommendation. Jeesh what a dope. All my kids have gone to an ISL prep school Pretty sure I'm aware of the process but thanks for playing.
Yeah ok because teachers have no problem speaking in code about how their student's really not that good of student and the grades they have been given are therefore inflated. That speaks real well of the teacher who while speaking in code has to put their name on the "commendation". They also have no interest in seeing the kid move up and on as well as improving his or her schools stature through matriculation to prep schools. What a dope.
Yes because all kids that have good grades, are good athletes, score well on placement tests could just end up sitting in the back of the classroom playing with themselves. The SSAT is so easy to just regurgitate memorized information that it takes teachers speaking in "code" to direct admissions offices from making bad decisions. OK Beavis, you win.
I agree with the poster who thinks the "code talking" allegation is hyperbole. Truly professional teachers, counselors, administrators, etc. have integrity and standards. They will not overstate or understate their genuine assessment of a student applicant or athlete. To do so only undermines credibility and professional reputation.
Moreover, if it were true, as the post seem to suggest, that the teacher comments are all sugar-coated, obligatory fluff with some subtle texture mixed in, amounting to "code talking", then why even bother making everyone go through the silly kabuki dance? This makes a mockery of the process!
I submit that what you describe as talking in code is really just how educated professionals communicate. The teachers expect any reader/user to be able to interpret the plain meaning of the multi-syllable, big words written.
Just because YOU need a dictionary, thesaurus, and google does not mean the teachers are talking code!
There's some truth to the code talking. The teacher has to be careful because what he or she writes is going to become public knowledge. If they come right out and say "this kid is a moron, and a jerk on top of that", it's not the greatest career move as the parents, aka taxpayers, aren't going to take that well and could become serious thorns in the side of that teacher and his/her career.
The phrase "damming(sic) with faint praise" is very applicable here. If a teacher likes and respects a student, they're going to be happy for them to be getting an opportunity at prep school, and will go above and beyond on the recommendation. Anything less than that - "works hard, able, solid student" - might as well be a "meh, whatever, I don't care one way or the other, the kid's ok but won't be adding anything special to your school", because that's how it's read in the admissions office.
Right.... kind of like the code for a blind date who has "a good personality" (lol). When everyone understands it, it is not really a code.
I think what everyone understands is that there is recommendation "inflation" just like there is grade "inflation".
Similarly when you are a dinner guest, and you are asked, "how was the meal?". When everyone knows how to interpret the answer, it is not a code!