Does school have to "hurt" to be good?

Prep School Admissions Prep School Parents
21

Here are some random thoughts on the issue I introduced in my original post (above).

According to my daughter, a student has the usual three options: sleep, study, or socialize–pick two. It would be exceedingly difficult to do all three. It’s a one-and-a-half-day weekend at her school, and as Sunday is for completing the next day’s assignments, one can never adequately unwind. The pressure is apparently unrelenting.

But she persevered and is looking forward to returning. Like most of the kids at her school, she seems to be built for such a regimen. And it’s remarkable that only two kids from her ninth grade class left over the course of the year–these schools really are adept at selecting kids who are ready, willing, and able to get with the program. As challenging as it is, it is manifestly doable. But at what cost? Where is the line between hard work and masochism?

Of course, my daughter was sick–including a concussion incurred playing hockey–for almost the entire year. She missed some classes, but could never take the full week off that would have helped her to recover from her various illnesses in a timely manner. At peak illness periods, there’s a line to get into the health center. Kids do their best to tough it out, to not fold under the pressure. No one can afford to fall behind. But one has to wonder how the continuous stress and the recurring cycles of campus-wide illness are are affecting the long term physical and emotional health of these kids.

My daughter, as you may recall, is a supremely competitive kid. But she didn’t know the meaning of the word until she got to this school. Whether it’s academics, athletics, or socializing, every aspect of school life involves competition. There is literally no end to it–everyone is competing at everything all the time. If you mention that you have a sunburn, somebody will tell you that their’s is worse. If you say that you don’t have a lot of work one evening, someone will tell you that they have even less. On the other hand, if you complain about having too much work, that same person will claim to have so much more than you!

Whatever it is, everyone wants to do more or do it better. Naturally, some of this is just harmless posturing, but the all-pervasive competitive spirit is a fact and it can wear one down. Some kids apparently take it way too far, continually seeking to prevail at all costs, even in the most trivial endeavors. And, note well: the girls are much more competitive than the boys.

Since before they could speak, these kids have been expected to perform. They’ve been observed, analyzed, assessed, evaluated, rated, categorized, grouped, and frequently ranked, with the results unfailingly recorded for all time at every step of the way. Essentially, they have been competing all along.

Is it any wonder that some of these forever striving, endlessly rated kids will be apt to bring the same evaluative spirit to their social experiences? After all, it’s what they’ve lived. I think schools are fighting a losing battle if they think they can suddenly prohibit this sort of behavior in the social sphere. And it’s not just the boys: girls keep score, too.

And I know it’s commonly asserted that the kids at one school or another aren’t competitive “with each other,” but only “with themselves”–but what does that mean? The kids at these schools may not be sabotaging their classmates’ science experiments or stealing their notebooks, but everyone is working hard to finish first, to get the “A,” to continue up the ladder. Whether they’re chasing grades, a team captaincy, or the favor of classmates, it’s all about competition, call it what you will.

And that’s not to say that such an educational environment fails these students in later life. In an increasingly competitive world, the hardest workers usually reap the greatest rewards. But is personal success in the professional sphere the sole measure of a life? Do tirelessly ambitious top-level professionals necessarily make good citizens, or even good parents?

So, maybe we should be asking ourselves about both the short-term and the long-term implications of such hyper-competitive school environments. Do they serve to create kids who are focused solely on winning and succeeding? And what kind of adults do such kids become?

Please understand that I have no beef with my daughter’s school. Quite to the contrary, I’m grateful that she has found a school that is such a good fit for her. And I’ll even allow for the possibility that these pressure-cooker schools have got it right. Nonetheless, I believe these are questions that need to be asked.

22

I’m not sure there are any questions here. No one is forcing anyone to be competitive or put themselves into a pressure cooker or pick two out of three. It’s perfectly OK to opt out of that rat race and choose a different path. Those who like the heat generally thrive in it and become productive members of society, as do those who go a different route. Anyone who has concerns about their child’s health should focus on resolving those issues. Boarding schools and other pressure cookers are not for everyone. There are alternatives.

23

According to my daughter she has three options, socializing, sports, and sleep - pick two, which may explain her grades (half kidding).

24

@ChoatieMom makes a good point. One can always choose to opt out of the rat race. The problem is the people who don’t opt out–they’ve been let loose in the world.

And I think we all have seen the havoc that our elites have wreaked upon our society, our economy, our environment, and on countless people around the globe. People who are brought up to chase success, who are rewarded not for doing good but for doing well, who are largely focused on themselves, on their own achievement and advancement, may no longer be the sort of people who should be running things.

I can’t imagine how this state of affairs wouldn’t prompt us all to ask questions about elite education.

25

Could we, ah, step off the ledge?

  1. Unfortunately, high school students are stressed out in many high schools, not just schools that pride themselves on being “elite.” Denise Pope has written about this issue for years.

But you know, it’s supposition without foundation to presume that the world would be a better place if it were run by a different sort of elite. That’s usually the line of stuff peddled by people who want to sell stuff to the gullible.

Most of the people functioning as decision-making elites in our society did not attend “elite” schools. If you look up Congress, you’ll see very few elite school alumni. There is a bias against the alumni of such schools, as you’ll notice in time, now that you have your own elite-graduate-in-the-making.

  1. To be pragmatic, a few very highly ranked prep schools have a practice of simply flooding students with work. There is far too much work for any student to have a hope of completing it in a satisfactory manner. The intent is for the students to learn to “triage” their workload, i.e. to discern which work must be done, which does not have to be done, and which should be done as time permits.

I think it’s a rotten system. One flaw with it is that, as admissions standards have risen, a few of the students are bright enough to come close to completing the work. Thus, if not closely supervised, they really might work until they are ill. There are other students who try to keep up with the geniuses (genii?). I don’t have the impression that the schools have enough staff to closely monitor students, in addition to which some of the schools seem to have the idea that their Super Bright, Mature students are really proto-adults, so they don’t need close monitoring.

Not all schools follow this pattern. Only a handful do.

  1. @Donfefe, the widespread competitive culture your daughter notices at her school… It sounds to me as if the school selects for such students. To what extent is it taught at the school, and to what extent is it a reflection of the student body’s innate characteristics?

When someone on here complains about schools turning down “perfect” candidates (and for elite colleges as well), please consider that the schools/colleges may be trying to foster a better culture for the student body by looking for variety in the students’ outlook on life.

Edited to add: This is why I believe in looking past a school’s ranking to the more intangible aspects of school culture. Some questions to ask, or at least think about, when looking at a school:

How many students choose to leave the school due to social or academic pressures?
How many students are on medication for anxiety, depression or ADD?
What sort of careers do alumni select? Are there any alumni in creative or nurturing professions?
How many students choose a gap year before college?
How much sleep do students get, on average?
Has the school done a study of student sleep habits?

26

This is an interesting thread that touches on so many aspects of educational achievement and what it means to be a “top” student.

I actually think that much of the ruthless pressure that kids feel today is because standards have gone down, not up, over the years. For instance, grade inflation is rampant. I recently heard a statistic that literally half of US high school seniors have an “A” average. I haven’t confirmed that, but it does not sound implausible. Same story with standardized testing. Since the time I took the SAT over 30 years ago, the test has been revised - and scoring “recentered” - no fewer than three times. Each revision has had the effect of making the test “easier” in the sense that top scoring students cannot be differentiated from one another. A 1500+ score was something very special 30+ years ago; today it is really sort of a floor for high achieving students. A 1600 today is common. That was definitely not the case 30 years ago.

In my opinion, the watering down of grade and standardized test metrics has led to an “arm’s race” among students to differentiate themselves. This attitude has filtered through to extracurricular achievements, academic plaudits outside the traditional “grades + SAT (or ACT)” track, obsession with “packaging” of students, etc.

I’m sure my opinion is a minority one. But I nevertheless think that some of the older approaches, such as enforced “curves” in high school classes and standardized tests that truly attempt to distinguish among the “top” students (because they are who we are talking about here, isn’t it?), would ultimately lead to less perceived pressure on students.

27

This is a current CC featured thread:

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/high-school-life/2005522-as-on-the-rise-in-u-s-report-cards-but-sats-flounder-p1.html

28

@SatchelSF I agree. Another related change, of course, is all the prepping and retesting to squeeze the highest possible SAT or ACT score from students, rather than just taking the test and accepting the results. I don’t think the SAT should ever have been recentered. It would have remained a constant reference point to help demonstrate how abysmally low the standards have become in much of American public education. And because all this is off topic…no, I don’t think school has to hurt to be good. And I don’t think my children’s school hurts them or is too stressful other than inasmuch as they sometimes opt in favor of more stress (more/harder classes, more/more challenging activities). And that’s good.

29

I think Lawrenceville is on to something. I believe that academic rigor in boarding schools has two dimensions - one qualitative (depth, thoroughness, difficulty and level of work) and one quantitative (number of courses, hours of study, amount of assigned reading materials, Saturday classes etc). While you cannot achieve qualitative rigor below a certain amount of quantitative rigor, one can overdo it on the quantitative side.

By overloading on the quantitative dimension, it is important to note that quality is not necessarily ensured. Too much quantitative rigor may actually be detrimental for students to achieve quality, innovation and creativity. Some BS are deemed rigorous because they push students way out of their comfort zones and challenge their students to process an inordinate amount of work. While extraordinary amount of work may help students acquire grit, endurance and better time management and multitasking capabilities, it sometimes comes at a heavy cost. I understand that each student has a different capacity and desire for work and that one cannot readily generalize that a specific program has too much quantitative rigor.

Even so, as a parent, I am concerned that in too many student surveys at top BS, the average student only gets six and a half hours of sleep per day. Call it what you will, but that is not healthy. Many medical studies maintain that teenagers require significantly more hours of sleep to properly develop and function.

It is no coincidence that Andover has focused on the sleep deprivation issue and has even proposed to change its schedule to provide more balance (it has yet to implement the new class schedule). Likewise, a few years ago, Deerfield instituted a new daily class schedule which starts later in the day, after it concluded that more hours of sleep increases student performance. In short, I think that Lawrenceville is right to reexamine the quantitative dimension of rigor without sacrificing the qualitative aspect that defines top academic boarding schools like Lawrenceville. Boarding schools should not be afraid to experiment and tweak their programs.

30

My Deerfield daughter certainly appreciates the new later start at 8:30. Really the only thing that troubled me about Exeter (it is an amazing place) was the earlier start with ECs in the middle and more classes until 6 pm. I know that students have a later start some days but it still felt long. Throw in a few Saturdays here and there too.

31

Starting this fall, SPS will have a new schedule too, with chapel at 8:30 and classes at 9 am.

32

Exeter is changing their schedule after this coming year too. They are going to more typical schedule with ECs in the afternoon. SwimKid is actually sad about it. He likes the idea of sports breaking up the day and giving his mind a break. We shall see when the late classes are a reality if he still feels that way lol.

33

Apropos of this discussion, from a sign I once saw hanging in a gas station, circa 1965:

“I love hard work. I can watch it for hours!”

I am inexpressibly grateful that this forum affords me the opportunity to explore the prep school issues that concern me most. Whenever I start a thread, I try to encourage a wide range of stimulating responses from the many thoughtful individuals who visit this site. Of course, I don’t always succeed in this endeavor. I realize that I often raise knotty, abstract issues and, hence, sometimes I have to push just a bit to elicit responses. Unfortunately, in the process, I occasionally ruffle some plumage. I certainly don’t mean to cause anyone any needless indignation, and I apologize to those whom I may have put off with my words.

My sincere thanks to everyone who has taken the time to respond to the questions I have posed on this thread. Most of all, I’d like to thank @Periwinkle, who has helpfully noted that,

“it’s supposition without foundation to presume that the world would be a better place if it were run by a different sort of elite. That’s usually the line of stuff peddled by people who want to sell stuff to the gullible.”

Bravo! Periwinkle’s refreshingly optimistic observations on our elites are just as pertinent today as they were back in the last golden age of elite privilege, the Roaring Twenties. After all, stock market crashes come and go, and everything’s fine in the end. And, needless to say, it’s flattering to learn that my words are being read on East Egg!

Hey, I’m just joking around! Sincere thanks to Periwinkle for a comprehensive, well-reasoned, and informative post.

I will add, however, that I’m not looking to pick on one or another of the acronym schools. The questions I raise in my last posts apply not only to prep schools, but to all institutions within our society. Yes, we should be questioning every aspect of our culture. We must continually assess our practices in light of our professed values and goals. We must strive to be honest in our self-examination and rigorously, even brutally self-critical. We simply cannot afford to be otherwise.

We are aware today that many, many boarding schools have, over the years, failed in this endeavor–and the repercussions are still being felt. If people only had the strength to ask the difficult questions back then, a lot of pain and heartache could probably have been averted.

34

I think that setting one standard for all children–and they are all children–is harmful.

To explain, a college admissions official once pointed out that the most competitive colleges accept the students who peak early. Really, many of these students are at the top of their game in middle school.

That does not mean (in my opinion) that those students will be the most successful of their generation, 30 years later. You will find many people online who assert that. When I think of the most successful people I know, though, many of them “found their groove” later than middle school, often in fields that hadn’t been invented when they were in middle school.

Children develop at different rates, and at different times. I am not saying that everyone will be equally productive or intelligent as adults. However, a high SAT score is not necessarily proof of high intelligence. It could mean the student memorized the answers beforehand, or that a ringer took the test. (http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/college-sat-one/) Numerous college admissions officials warned against making an extracurricular activity of taking numerous SAT tests in the search for a perfect score.

@DonFefe, the schools love to point to prominent alumni. They don’t point to the alumni who are perhaps productive citizens, but aren’t among the movers and shakers. Most successful politicians did not graduate from boarding schools, nor from the Ivy League. http://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Educated-Is-Your/127845

A number of successful Tech billionaires did not complete college, nor did they attend boarding school. Bill Gates. Steve Jobs. Steve Wozniak. Michael Dell. Larry Ellison. Etc.

One place in the modern world where successive racking up of academic accolades is highly prized is the world of medical education. That, however, in my opinion, is due to the restriction of places at US medical schools. The number of tenured professorships at US universities has been steadily falling over time, due to the increased use of adjuncts. That also creates pressure for students to demonstrate brilliance on a continuing basis.

However, again, I am very tired of people who themselves are elite complaining about the elite. Every generation has complained about their leaders since the beginning of time. Every generation has complained about bankers and lawyers since the beginning of time.

35

I’m not sure if I’m bright enough to fully follow the thread of your argument, here, @Periwinkle. Though I respect and honor you for the seriousness and sincerity of your concerns.

I’ll add only that Bill Gates may not have gone to boarding school, but he did go to the private Lakeside School. And it should surprise no one that a small percentage of congresspeople hail from elite schools, as virtually all of these people have grown up in areas of the country where elite private education is essentially unknown. Moreover, I don’t really see most congresspeople as members of the elite–they are more akin to lowly functionaries who are paid to follow the orders of their big-money masters.

And there seems to be little question that for generations boarding school-educated elites have been overrepresented on both Wall Street and in the oval office–two places where, arguably, the real power resides. In fact, some law firms, investment banks, and consulting firms decline to even consider non-Ivy grads. I’ve read that Time magazine used to favor graduates of Hotchkiss. And I would bet that connections made at elite schools among peers and alumni are still advancing the careers of graduates at the highest levels.

But to return to my original concern. People who come out of the most rigorous and competitive schools, energetic people who possess the proven ability to focus closely and function efficiently at a high level for extended periods of time, can be a valuable resource in any endeavor. But, unfortunately, hard work alone is morally neutral, at best–after all, even the devil works hard! I can’t help but wonder occasionally about the ends to which all of that hard work is devoted, both at school and after.

And again, while it may sound like I’m taking sides, I’m mainly just playing devil’s advocate. I haven’t made up my mind about any of these issues. I would never deny that the boarding school experiences my children have been afforded have provided them with advantages that they would not have received had they stayed home. It’s only that based on what I hear from my younger child–from my future “Monster of the Universe”–about her school, I am occasionally prompted to wonder about the overall effects and implications of such an educational experience for good and, possibly, for ill.

I am reaching out to other parents here in the hope of hearing how they have reconciled themselves to any conflicts that exist between their personal values and those values that are promoted at their children’s elite schools. On the whole, it would seem that most parents who post here experience no such conflicts. Yet some have expressed concerns about the grinding pace of life at certain schools. While my child seems to welcome that sort of existence, I still wonder if it’s necessarily the best thing for her, or for our society.

36

Let us not forget that such rigor and competitiveness was not always the norm. In a recent article in “The New Yorker,” Harvard professor Stephen Greenblatt makes these observations:

"I attended university in a very different world from the one in which I now teach and live. For a start, Yale College, which I entered in 1961, was all male. Women were not matriculated until five years after I had received my B.A. degree. Among the undergraduates, there were only a handful of students from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, and very few African-Americans, Asian-Americans, or Hispanics, unless one counted a couple of prep-school-educated heirs to grand South American fortunes.

"The Yale that I attended was overwhelmingly North American and white, as well as largely Protestant. It was difficult for the admissions office to identify Catholics, but applicants with conspicuously Irish, Italian, or Polish names were at a disadvantage. For Jews, there was a numerus clausus, not even disguised by the convenient excuse of ‘geographical distribution.’ And the whole system was upheld by a significant number of legacies, along with a pervasive air of privilege and clubbiness. To display too much interest in one’s studies or a concern for grades was distinctly uncool. This was still the era of what was called the ‘gentleman’s C.’

“When I began to take classes at Yale, I could not understand, let alone emulate, the amused indifference of many of my classmates.” (“The New Yorker,” July 10 and 17, 2017.)

Shamus Khan (author of “Privilege”) similarly speaks of the difference between the old days and the present. While he applauds the openness and inclusiveness of our present elites, he expresses concern for the role that the new meritocracy plays in perpetuating durable inequalities. And aren’t hard work, rigor, and competitiveness the very essence of meritocratic institutions?

37

Although prep school culture was, until recently, entirely foreign to our family, the only major conflict with my personal values that has come to light is the practice of handing out cigars at graduation.

38

@DonFefe, the fact that the “gentleman’s C” no longer exists anywhere is a cue that the “old boys’ club” of the past no longer exists. Fifty-six years is two generations. In college terms, it’s 11 college generations. In the 60s, many more industry leaders were owned by families. The era of the industrialist families seems to have passed into history.

I find it difficult, as well, to sort out the effects that result from attending a particular school/college, and being a member of a family that cares enough about education to send a child to a private (or exam) school at all. Or coming from a family that cares enough about education to take on a longer adult commute to provide the children with a good public school district.

I agree that some students are working too hard. On the other hand, there are students who need a very high level of work for them to remain interested in school at all. Think of how many parents weigh on this site the merits of attending a private school, or just enrolling in college early.

However, years ago when I was young, and dinosaurs roamed the earth, no one would have predicted that the A/V geeks and computer hobbyists would be calling the shots in the 21st century. Remember when calling someone a Geek was an insult? The problem with the future is that it hasn’t happened yet.

So I recommend not attending a school because it seems to be a “ticket to the meritocracy.” Attend a school because the education is worth the price you pay (including living away from home.)

39

I’m late to this discussion, but I found it fascinating. Facilitated many interesting conversations with our DD and younger son, who currently attends a competitve public school. One topic that kept coming up in our household was mental illness. My DD was surprised how many BS students were struggling with various forms of mental health issues ( not related to ADD/ADHD ) but more severe anxiety/depression/addiction… thoughts?

40

What did your DD think of the support her classmates with anxiety and depression received at BS? Did she think they would have been better off at home? I’m not sure I’d send an anxious kid to BS…