<p>There are probably many factors which contribute to him not acing his humanities classes (i.e., poor teaching methods, lack of organization, etc.). Now that you mention it though, and something I haven’t considered before, his lack of maturity probably does play a role. He has always been a “Just the facts please, ma’am” kind of kid so I think that it is hard for him to comprehend the many Classics read in English. He is naive in a lot of ways so it may be hard for him to relate to characters, theme, etc. Not sure what I can do about that except let him experience the real world. So I need to remind myself that, even though he is bright, there are just some things he doesn’t “get” and that’s okay. </p>
<p>Definitely learning a lot from this thread. Thank you.</p>
<p>A lot of kids experience literature classics at too young of an age, before they can really appreciate them. It’s not the end of the world, they may come back and re-read them later, once they have some more experience. </p>
<p>To give you an example, when I was 10 I read Animal Farm (we had a copy in my 4th grade class for some reason). And I literally thought it was an interesting but slightly strange story about animals on a farm. So I read it, finished it, shrugged, and never really got what the fuss was about until I was old enough and mature enough to read Orwell and understand the many layers of context and meaning. Similarly, I tried to read Catcher in the Rye when I was 15 or so and just did not get it. I didn’t get into it, wasn’t able to relate to the characters, etc etc etc. I spent a lot of time telling people (in my infinitely brilliant teenage way) that Salinger was like, soooo overrated It’s kind of embarassing to look back on that now…</p>
<p>My math-loving S read Flatland in 4th grade. He got the math but he did not get the satire on Victorian mores. In 9th grade he was asked to read Crime and Punishment. He did not get the characters or the discussions of religion. He thought the book was a real bore. I’m afraid he won’t go back to it now that he is older and more capable of understanding more than just the plot.</p>
<p>Some kids find a way to relate to “Literature” by putting it into context they enjoy. I recall my S reading Russian lit, and turned to history books to understand. Had he had to write a paper, I’m sure it would have reflected the historical period rather than character study.</p>
<p>In truth, I can’t recall any depth English papers, just lots of grammar quizzes and poetry.</p>
<p>Now if your S took IB English, he’d be swamped committing “crimes against literature,” as S2 puts it! They dissect and analyze far more than those authors ever intended… S2’s 9th grade pre-IB English class was tougher than S1’s AP Lang/Comp, and they had much the same reading list. (They had those classes the same year so the comparison was abundantly clear.)</p>
<p>What got S1 hooked on history and social sciences was the news. He is a newspaper junkie and reading articles there got him interested in the historical background behind the headlines. History Channel is also a great way to expand one’s horizons. </p>
<p>Our kids hardly ever had grammar quizzes or vocab in HS.</p>
<p>bogibogi, there are definitely maturity issues that come along with reading some of these classics. I’ve read several of the books my kids have studied and found that many times, they didn’t get the cultural or historical references/allusions/satires, even if they are relatively well-read kids. (S1 has always been a ravenous reader, but not so tuned into those subtexts. S2 gets the historical stuff and has had IB pounded into his head, so he finds it somewhat easier.) </p>
<p>We found that if S1 took AP/IB classes in social sciences/humanities, the grades were a lot better than in a regular or honors course. More discussion, more motivated kids, etc.</p>
<p>“We found that if S1 took AP/IB classes in social sciences/humanities, the grades were a lot better than in a regular or honors course. More discussion, more motivated kids, etc.”</p>
<p>Very interesting CountingDown. Did anyone else find this to be true? Just wondering whether this is something to explore or avoid at all cost.</p>
<p>My Ss were in regular (Honors and APs) classes rather than IB. However, they were used to writing papers for humanities and social studies classes since 3rd-4th grades and the teachers encouraged class discussion. I agree with CountingDown that class discussions do get the students more engaged and motivated.</p>
<p>I would not worry yet. I was in the same position a few years ago. I came from the advanced IGCSE system in Zimbabwe to a far inferior curriculum in SA. For two years, I did nothing and scored low B’s. In my last two years though, I realised that I needed the grades. I did not work ‘hard’ but just hard enough, even in the classes I didn’t like to give me a shot a HYP (Which I am anxiously waiting for now). Like your son, I was nationally ranked in Science and Maths, but also English. My point here is that, as the work becomes harder, his marks will improve because it will begin to interest him, and college will become an immediate reality.</p>
<p>If he made MOSP, your son probably is right that elite colleges will ignore his grades in english and social studies. (This assumes that only the top 50-60 make MOSP. If it is more than that, like 150, then grades may matter more.)</p>
<p>I’ve always felt that english helps you develop as a thinker. For example, bridging two seemingly unrelated fields is a very verbal ability. Or asking yourself what seems missing in a theory, or using analogies marrying scientific concepts and non-scientific scenarios in order to develop a new theory. Assessing the broader significance of one’s work and looking for a new way of looking at a problem are also english/verbal exercises. And these are skills which are vital to developing a research program, to solve the big problems. If you’ve read about Oppenheimer, you know that he was a very verbal guy. I think this helped him be an outstanding theoretical physicist. The guy who invented string theory was a journalism major, indicative of some kind of english bent.</p>
<p>Personally, I knew a mathematician who was very verbal and artistic. When he was high school, he won ARML but didn’t win the big math competitions. Certainly he didn’t get close to MOSP. Anyway, his roommate at Harvard crushed all these competitions. However, the guy less talented at the math contests was the one who ended up solving an important 100-yr old problem in grad school and getting a faculty position at Harvard, while his former genius roommate couldn’t get a faculty position despite the fact that math competitions were so effortless. It is my theory that it was the verbal ability that set my friend apart and enabled him to solve that 100-year-old problem. </p>
<p>I don’t want to discount these math competitions, because certainly they are more than computational exercises. However, I do think that the guys who are good at english tend to have more staying power in academia.</p>
<p>So while I think your son will probably get into at least several top 5 schools (if not all of them), maybe he can be motivated to apply himself in english class if he thinks it may help him in a mathematics or technical career down-the-line.</p>
It’s kind of embarassing to look back on that now…</p>