<p>Yes, it will continue. Today I read an article about the change in AP tests (no penalty for wrong answers so guessing is now advisable), which then talked about the increased prevalence of AP classes and much higher numbers of kids taking them within the last ten years. One principal was quoted as saying his goal is for every student in his high school to have completed one semester of college before graduation. So, that’s what? 3-4 AP classes? Now, if even the below-average kids are taking 4 AP’s, how many will the tippy-top kids have to take? No doubt they’ll have to max out the AP curriculum offered by the high school, plus add some more college classes to boot.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: Coining “Johnny, Inc.” was brilliant. You rule!</p>
<p>I think that was Momzie who came up with “Johhny, Inc.” in post #227.</p>
<p>Honestly, after reading this thread, I am amazed my DIY kid was able to get in where she did, because it is a less level playing field out there than I ever could have imagined. I knew about the SAT cram schools and private tutoring, but I had no idea how far some people are taking this college admissions game. Thank God that is all behind us, because this sickens me. I feel sorry for Johnny, Inc, I really do. This is definitely beyond doing what’s best for your kid, if helping him or her become a happy, functional, well-balanced, independent adult is the goal. Obviously, that is not the goal for some.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now that’s unfair. The solution should be open enrollment to the honors math course. Whoever wants to take it takes it. I don’t believe less able kids can keep up with all the school work and ECs.</p>
<p>Re-Post #273 Data point here- Like Curm that wasn’t our experience regarding the Team approach, coaching and Tutoring. However, the good advice part was had from Good old CC and a specific poster that I followed diligently, since my child had the same interest as the poster’s kid. </p>
<p>So folks it can be done, academically top performing kids can still get into great schools without private tutors.
My kid had three tutors 
- Himself,
- CC and some awesome posters
- Self Appointed Research Specialist (ME). :D. However, after hearing too much CC talk His third tutor was displaced. </p>
<p>As Curm mentioned so much is available here. Many kids on these forums will be peers/competitors of your sons and daughters. Who better to collaborate with than them albeit virtually?</p>
<p>At the end of the day, haven’t heard a peep out of my kid saying who used a tutor and who didn’t. Not that I would. However, it appears that they are all having a Grand old time in college. Those who were tutored and those who were not. Its all 
</p>
<p>"I feel quite confident that it does, indeed, all shake out in the long run. And that these endless comparisons of your kids to other kids are a huge waste of time, effort and emotion.</p>
<p>If Pushy Helicopter Mom gets Johnny Inc. into Harvard and your kid “only” gets into a Top 30 school, then what? Will the world come to a screeching halt? Will your kid be destined only to flip burgers? Of course not. And really, are any of you going to have any bit of contact with Pushy Helicopter Mom or Johnny Inc. the moment that high school is over? These people are <em>nothing</em> in my life. For the life of me, I don’t understand why they seem to loom so large for some of you, and why their comings, goings and successes are so important to some of you. "</p>
<p>IME, the “shaking out” often happens the moment the Johnny, Inc. kid hits the college campus and starts receiving his/her first C, D, or F because the years of micromanaging parents, teachers, and tutors created an environment where s(he) was unable to develop self-motivation, initiative, self-reliance, and the ability to self-manage to get things done on his/her own. The high school classmates who attended Ivies observed plenty of such students who were struggling or even flunking courses my classmates found to be quite manageable or even a joke because of those issues. </p>
<p>Saw similar Johnny, Inc type kids at my own LAC which was ironic considering their high school records, AP/IB records, and standardized test scores were far more impressive on paper than my own and yet…they were struggling or failing courses I felt were quite manageable or even easy…even in subjects which were my weaknesses in high school and despite the fact I was never allowed to take an AP course because I was a mediocre high school student. </p>
<p>I even had the opportunity to take a few undergrad courses at an Ivy with Ivy students and was surprised to see how most of them were struggling and panicked about failing in a college-level intro stats course. Though I was a C/D level math student in high school, the course proceeded at a manageable pace and I ended up aceing the course while working full-time…and I never took a stats course before that point…or since.</p>
<p>The answer to how do they do the ECs etc. when taking summer courses at CC is - when there is a will, there is a way. When parents devise clever ECs, they can make those happen, too. I have been taken aback with parents arranging internships, jobs, volunteering…</p>
<p>Mine always had enough major activities in their areas of interest to choose from and to apply to that they were able to stay in the driver’s seat. I never gave specific direction.</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen here in Silicon Valley, the practice of tutoring etc. is done by higher-status, well-educated folks who are extremely nervous and “requiring” their kids to get some top tier offers. Those kids sure as heck comply with their parents’ requirements. I have no knowledge of any rebellion. </p>
<p>They often seem to also like that their kids socialize with their own ethnic group. I have a kid (who is easily friendly with people from other ethnic backgrounds) and she was refused entry into a long-running neighborhood tutoring group even though she was arguably close friends with several students in it. It was crystal clear it was because of her ethnic group (the friend laughed about it, slightly embarrassed). This group (slightly multi-aged) has been running for yrs.</p>
<p>I’m not sure all on this thread fully realize the extent of the sophisticated schemes some of us are taking note of. The extent of the planning can be extraordinary; when one is in a region filled with top performers, it seems that very little differences can make a big difference and some possibly undeserving kids have received recognition, awards, offers.</p>
<p>As for what they do once they get to university…mom pressures them to get into “worthy” ECs and work/volunteer/do internship at nearby hospital (seems to be latest fad I am hearing about) - you know, biomedical engineering is a MUST. If I’ve heard that once, I’ve heard that a thousand times…from parents…
Here’s a tip for those doing apps -BTW Stanford is now “actively targeting potential humanities majors” for admissions (The Stanford Daily, Editorial, October 11, 2010, p.3)</p>
<p>There’s an arms race in our HS to see who can submit the most apps to top schools. Money and support make a big difference.</p>
<p>I think some who went through the college admissions process may be surprised it has “ramped up” so much in the most recent yrs. My knowledge and experience and observations are up to date. Sharing info with others, including on CC, and learning to do well and get ahead are admirable, but this thread instantly caught my attention since the practices have gotten so out of hand recently…</p>
<p>Shout out to Momzie!</p>
<p>At the same time this tutoring binge is going on, aren’t the top colleges making more of an effort to reach down to cherry-pick the very top students from lessor schools, often in low-income neighborhoods, even when those kids have lower stats? Seeking out kids whose parents never went to college? I suspect the admissions officers are keenly aware that the system is being gamed in a big way and are moving to once again change the rules of the game.</p>
<p>I didn’t coin Johnny Inc!</p>
<p>For kids who are “just” super smart and work hard and do community ECs, they can get into a “good” school, but probably not the top tier."</p>
<p>Yet this doesn’t square with real life kids I know who got into top 20 schools, who really were normal-bright engaged kids who were on the soccer team and did the school play, but who didn’t take college courses or cure cancer over the summer.</p>
<p>This is my first time posting!</p>
<p>There has been a lot of talk on this thread about Saturday schools run by various ethnic groups. I know about the Russian school, so I wanted to add a bit to the discussion by providing a different perspective. I came here from Russia (USSR back then, over 30 years ago) as a teen, so I have first had experience with Russian schools. The math/science education was (don’t know how it is now) so far ahead of what we have in the US that it’s mind boggling. I remember my parents were aghast at the math curriculum which was taught in the US school when we came here and unfortunately, it hasn’t gotten much better.</p>
<p>Believe it or not, we were presented with simple algebraic equations in first grade and I don’t mean something that introduced algebraic concepts via pictures or what not, but actual problems like x+2=5, find x. By the time we were in third grade (I still have my third grad math book we brought with us), we were solving systems of equations with two unknowns and doing word problems, including everyone’s favorite - two trains leave from point A and B, etc. By sixth grade we were taking physics, geometry, and more advanced algebra.</p>
<p>So in the Russian Saturday schools with which I am familiar, the kids are not tutored on math they are learning in school, they are taught math with the rigor that the immigrant parents had when they were in school and don’t want their kids to miss out on. </p>
<p>My friends are often shocked when I tell them what we learning in math classes back in USSR, and their first comment is usually along the lines of “well, you were good at math, what about the kids who weren’t…” Truthfully, I don’t know, I was too young to notice or care, but I suspect that many kids can actually learn more and at a faster pace than we think, and so most were OK., I certainly was not the only one who did well in those classes. Also, I do remember, that there were kids who did very poorly. They failed, they didn’t get it, but such was life! For better or worse, the curriculum was not geared to the lowest, or even the middle and not everyone was successful.</p>
<p>re: posts 288 and 290–Stanford’s literature expresses their bent toward admitting first generation college students and a high percentage of minority students. That supposed socio-economic diversity is one reason D was interested in S. She wanted to get away from the frenzied, uber-competitive, packaged Northeastern affluent set she had assumed were in abundant supply at the Ivies. When she took official recruiting visits at 4 Ivies, she found she really liked the people she met at all 4 schools even though they were indeed well-to-do. Ultimately, D chose Stanford for a number of other reasons.</p>
<p>So we went to the local accepted Stanford students reception and then also to the sending-off party for new freshmen. I did not note any of the advertised diversity. Almost with no exceptions, the families in attendance were upper class, dual income, dual professional households. Most kids were from private schools, usually from expensive prep schools near either of the major metropolitan areas of our state. The minorities present were upper class Asians–not poor blacks or Hispanics. The only discernably middle class people we met were 2 families of other athletes (though not the families of either of the 2 rowers or of the gymnast.)</p>
<p>So despite the supposed Stanford difference, my sense is that all of these elite schools including S are still mostly the province of the privileged. The students D has met so far all fit that profile. I know the Ivies say they look for kids from different economic backgrounds, but it’s probably very hard to find many with sufficient academic preparation. And if folks like us can’t compete with Johnny Inc., how can they?</p>
<p>I once proposed that a system be established that would require students to list all outside, paid tutoring and preparation not sanctioned by the school for remediation. And, a point system should be established that subtracts points from GPA or test scores in accord with the amount of outside tutoring, paid consulting, etc. received. This “accounting for privilege” metric would help level the playing field.</p>
<p>Since when does the playing field have to be “level”? What does that even mean?</p>
<p>@pizzagirl: love your comments, on this thread and others.
@idad: how on earth could that kind of requirement be “policed”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, right, take off points for bothering to learn more, to be better prepared, to overcome your weaknesses.</p>
<p>Why not subtract the IQ from the SAT score, that’s something innate and unfair?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you look at the stats of any highly selective school, around half of the kids attending are full pay–no financial aid at all. If my D’s roommies are a representatitve slice of a school population, 20-25% are being funded almost completely by the school and the remaining 25-30% are on partial aid. </p>
<p>The economics of running a private university must require that half be full paying customers, because that 50% mark sure seems to be prevalent.</p>
<p>idad…How about giving points to the kids who families provided their own enrichment to their children and gave up playing golf on Sundays or meeting friends every Friday night for dinner? What about the parents who did’nt go fullsteam ahead with driving kids to multiple sports so their kid could get the atletic scholarship? I don’t think you are serious when you say that points should be deducted anymore than I say points should be given. The world is not equal and who would want it to be?</p>