|
|
洛杉机华人区爬藤探讨& U/ Q0 ?4 j- X3 U3 i* A. w
! }" K0 Y( R; l' g( i# J: k
来源Aresident于2011-05-01; A; V- Q2 i' u+ ?0 c& _9 j
! c' t; K2 P7 C2 u
" b1 ?. k1 g* D P" z7 T; j3 I& w
最近小孩小学毕业，我也开始对洛杉机华人区高中开始研究。不怕诸位砸砖，我是比较热衷爬大藤。现在和大家分享一些信息，抛砖引玉。信息不全，请洛杉机华人朋友多多补充。我心目中的大藤含五所大学，Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT, Princeton.洛杉机好的私高，有Polytech, Harvard Westlake, and Chadwick,很难考进，学费较高。洛杉机华人区，学区好的有Whitney High (Cerritos), San Marino, Arcadia, South Pasadena, Walnut, Diamond Bar, University High (Irvine)，Parlos Verdes (Peninsula High and Parlos Verdes High), La Canada. 这些学校很多不公布爬藤报喜榜，所以我的信息支离破碎，请大家补充。Whitney High在南加公立高中排名第一，需选拔入学，亚裔众 多(74.9% Asian, 7.3% White), 2010年高三有169名学生,爬大藤方面，是3 accepted by Stanford and 1 by Yale，其余可能是0，似乎难以匹配南加第一的名头。San Marino是南加传统白人富人区，只有single family house,不过现在已沦陷，成了亚裔富人区，高三约282学生,约63% Asian and 28% white。2010年有3 for Stanford and 2 for Yale，比想象中华人西区第一名校有些距离。Arcadia应是华人西区第二名校，人口涵盖很多富人，中产，及少数新移民， 也有小孩在上学而父母在国内的。学生众多，高三约887人。69% Asian and 18% white. 2010年有1 for Harvard, 2 for MIT, 3 for Princeton, 3 for Stanford, and 2 for Yale.Walnut and Diamond Bar是华人东区名校，不过我没能找到爬藤数据。Parlos Verdes离华人中心区较为远，华人较不熟悉，Peninsula High 2010年有580高三学生，39% Asian and 45% Caucasian，6 for Harvard, 5 for MIT, 5 for Princeton, 10 for Stanford, and 3 for Yale.整体而言我有以下观察：华人占多数的高中名校，以Whitney High, San Marino High, and Arcadia High 为代表，1。似乎爬藤比例并不高，与国内的名校如人大附中爬北清差距较大。2。过去十年似乎爬藤有滑落趋势。 原因是什么呢？我有以下猜测：1.藤校一般较注重综合素质如领袖能力和社区服务，又讲究学生的独特性如某方面的特殊才能（体育，艺术，研究），会不会是我 们华人家长太注重成绩(GPA and SAT)，而忽略了全面发展？2。种族因素。可能顶级私立大学就是不想招太多亚裔？请大家讨论。+ |( ?2 l/ P/ S$ O4 x( |0 @
8 T) f6 W/ Q% G) }) w8 M
( ^9 p! r5 i8 \% X' c
3 Z, M$ ^3 n% A1 W# @6 b补充：
/ H! h, c* }+ u8 r# r5 G
, M' C4 |- ]; s8 p( d/ a- CTop 25 of America's Best High Schools - Gold Medal Rank8 R6 e h) i( S: m$ X
# E s' i( z; r
1. Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology7 G, I. y& b6 ]: @: B$ h' E2 u
2 m4 S K; |, \6 U% T, L, dLocation: Alexandria, VA( p, X8 d) j" B* q
Enrollment: 1,805
1 X2 Q1 z# }, u$ i2 D& ^/ IEconomically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 1.32 N7 R% ?! S7 D4 k
Minority Enrollment (% of Total): 4.9
) h( U x$ ]% g/ ?5 G! eQuality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 6.9
) F5 w" k' f' M" NCollege Readiness Index: 100.0
$ z% p3 M, i7 t" l+ U
3 ~# Y. }+ d: ~) }, ?% b& m8 m7 N2. International Academy+ ?) }# |+ S6 |8 i
, I8 w m6 H# @5 d* |6 ZLocation: Bloomfield Hills, MI1 d+ J! E* j2 Z2 B
Enrollment: 157
9 Y5 ]0 T. o. n% m9 W' A/ lEconomically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 0.6
8 e5 A6 H o! t6 x$ w+ c% pMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 3.2' s/ L G; U$ l! `7 B7 H
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 5.7, y: o# x, I2 F7 S7 F' B1 v
College Readiness Index: 100.0
1 ^4 U! c. V) o4 _5 d4 C6 u* l5 J3 N1 c& O( T
3. Whitney High School
# V" g+ M) R/ Y! R8 w- e) B1 A8 H" p9 q m! B
Location: Cerritos, CA
$ p. U5 ?, b; [" `3 {Enrollment: 9842 ]$ \: n$ r" H/ M8 ~% B& U
Economically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 11.00 o& m+ X0 }$ K# r; O
Minority Enrollment (% of Total): 11.5/ p1 `; Y+ C' f: I a, l4 }* n+ F0 e0 x
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 4.1
2 T( {+ t! B1 M: uCollege Readiness Index: 100.0# ?8 i$ J3 |) T5 \9 x
7 p& O1 e6 k8 P, V0 L4 I/ g" K4. Oxford Academy1 e Y; Z( Y$ X1 T6 ]6 u
8 N; X8 [6 s1 y% qLocation: Cypress, CA
+ m% \, F. {& k! I! ~Enrollment: 1.0215 \1 ~* ]7 w% S5 Z, m& z
Economically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 19.0
, i! A. {. a( B# O' ^: K Q( EMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 12.72 A B; w9 k+ \0 w8 E [* B- U6 M
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 5.0
# y) I/ k0 P, D0 f0 \- `! `. w( UCollege Readiness Index: 100.0
! f1 |5 g% R5 @, E4 k8 y4 X8 L7 ~6 y( O5 |+ M
5. School for the Talented and Gifted at Yvonne A. Ewell Townview Center2 L9 ^- H. \) ]8 w7 q
2 U% T+ |# V, Y) d8 Y
Location: Dallas, TX
1 N* l6 N- Z/ `8 m5 H$ gEnrollment: 209
# n. j, M' R1 l; G& S* M. t. b8 ~Economically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 24.9
/ s% `1 B: O/ \0 kMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 51.28 X4 }/ n u- w3 h% J8 ?
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 8.0, O) J5 ?1 v0 ~- F$ }
College Readiness Index: 100.0: i2 j/ i1 V6 @
5 d1 S4 k( N5 N* s9 Q( H. w7 s3 H) ?
6. Newcomers High School
1 l g5 h& p8 V( ^% U- i! s% u8 `$ q% c" |& \
Location: Long Island City, NY
) A9 N$ C O8 A' L* R0 ^Enrollment: 1,016* s! g. _# r' n
Economically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 79.0
" g8 Y2 F, V r% gMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 60.73 X* e$ f3 G7 A/ E' f7 K! a
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 1.6" @( v2 J! y5 {9 |/ x e: Y
College Readiness Index: 100.0
6 _2 J; F& y3 T1 P. X0 s" i# R T1 D/ e9 U, G
7. Pacific Collegiate School
# f0 t1 n8 @( J! E+ }- ]* X+ R6 s8 _ H2 ~8 U" W& D1 p
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
( I# U: P, F a, q5 Q; w+ O9 ZEnrollment: 383
% Z1 C, A% U! h) s; k4 E& U7 c) X0 jEconomically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 0.0
* |( h. b9 X! @! I8 t- ~Minority Enrollment (% of Total): 8.4
; M4 M9 z" K- n3 s( A f( qQuality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 4.5
' E3 E" k& ?8 K8 G P9 A SCollege Readiness Index: 100.0
# m& M: n5 m0 [8 a3 P6 E$ {$ t8 q
3 i$ r4 x t9 m/ r. m8. School of Science and Engineering Magnet3 U6 E3 m* I b+ e. W' J, y" D
: T3 o- G( d: M7 @, ~. u) Z- ?) y' NLocation: Dallas, TX8 f% i$ L2 ?5 F4 ~, n4 { Y& \
Enrollment: 3912 f* g1 x8 z+ E" w( Z
Economically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 48.3% K6 E8 X3 l3 n* ^# |
Minority Enrollment (% of Total): 72.4- v0 i6 ]2 i. c2 F9 `3 W ?3 x
Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 5.1
- z1 K' j. |$ }# b2 ]6 E+ E4 L xCollege Readiness Index: 100.0: F) `$ L: Y' R- B% Q* r: `. ~( }
/ [* X* Y2 a: W, d8 j% f. w
9. BASIS Tucson# F5 J/ K z# B3 z. X
7 b" T( [: u5 h1 t4 M1 G% {1 [
Location: Tucson, AZ" B3 T8 }9 k j
Enrollment: 527
7 x3 H2 g" y% o9 I4 y4 w2 K! zEconomically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 0.0
. I y$ R/ X* u( q* WMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 24.9
2 q1 h/ Z2 W G sQuality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 4.7
( Z8 E0 D9 L @/ Y: q7 U2 eCollege Readiness Index: 100.0; `- b* |7 n( {1 M. `
( ~4 \$ \3 ]- T+ c10. International School; k6 P* u) X3 t8 _3 M
0 W6 W2 Q; e- S# m- G4 @
Location: Bellevue, WA
8 b3 l2 f- H/ F3 [7 i, `; LEnrollment: 509
$ z5 ?6 x& C2 N4 Y. zEconomically Disadvantaged Students (% of Total Enrollment): 3.6
8 d) f8 j# z/ }- E% d8 x% O. EMinority Enrollment (% of Total): 1.7
; n# F( n7 } E9 y/ P; ~- S. h5 ?Quality-Adjusted Exams Per Test Taker: 3.8
3 \" m9 n' E5 G/ kCollege Readiness Index: 100.0 |
|
发表于 2011-10-22 06:26:18
