The difficulty of getting into selective colleges from high-performing high schools has been termed the "Frog Pond" effect. I wonder if the arguably better education one gets at a good high school outweighs the lower chance of selective college admission in predicting success, however defined.
I certainly would not try to dissuade anyone from sending their child to a school such as this without knowing the specifics of the child. Both my wife and I relished the learning opportunities we had and friendships we formed when we found ourselves in settings with highly competitive and intelligent cohorts. I just think it's appropriate to warn parents that a 4.0 and 2400 on the SAT will not be enough when the other kids are MOPpers, fencing in the Olympics, state champion chess players, playing in Carnegie Hall, and winning the Intel Science Fair in addition to having similar grades and test scores. If the kid isn't concerned with being valedictorian, winning achievement awards, or getting into HYPSMC, it might not even be an issue.
My original post was intended to inform the OP about this situation (with which I'm familiar since I live in the area) and to correct her misattribution of the credit for these extracurricular accomplishments which have everything to do with the parents and kids and nothing to do with the school.
