Family Gets Lesson in Admissions

Parents Forum
321

<p>Isn't it a lot harder to move up a percentile, the further you get from the average? (Like the difference between 50th and 53rd percentile is not that much, but 95th to 98th is huge?)</p>

<p>The SAT Verbal probably isn't a good predictor of someone's ability to read and write scientific literature.
Scientific literature is usually all in one tense, has very few grammar transformations, proceeds in a linear fashion, etc. SAT reading comprehension passages are generally nothing like this. What makes scientific literature hard to comprehend is the technical terms and concepts that aren't explicated for the layperson, not the text structure. Also, many reading comprehension test questions assess how well the reader can draw inferences from a passage. When you're reading a well-written scientific paper, you don't have to guess at the correct interpretation; the conclusions (or lack thereof) stated explicitly.</p>

<p>Reading instruction has changed a lot since most of us were kids. Often, very little time is directed to the higher order reading skills that tests like the SAT assess; most time is spent on de-coding, surface meaning, and memorization. One of the few good things about this, is that it fits pretty well with deciphering (and generating) scientific communication.</p>

322

<p>"A growing number of schools, such as [Robinson Principal Dan Meier], bestow the title on every graduate who earns a grade-point average of 4.0 or higher. Montgomery and Howard county schools have done away with the distinction to ease competition in a system that was producing increasingly more 4.0 students. Other districts -- Prince George's and Loudoun counties, Alexandria and the District included -- have stuck with the traditional route: Pick one valedictorian and a salutatorian. "</p>

<p>So this student also goes to a HS with 4000 plus students. Many of the Fairfax county HSs are really large. Being one of 41 top graduates seems silly, but when you have class sizes as large as some high schools it is a little more understandable.</p>

323

<p>The school may be huge, but the real story is the grading scale. Cross had a 4.15 gpa. I'm sure he's thrilled if the scale is weighted to a 5.0...and I'm sure the person with the 4.95 ain't so thrilled. I'm curious as to how extreme the weighting is at the school. At my d's school, 6.0 = unwtd A, 7.0 = wtd A. Out of 750 graduates, we had about 4 or 5 vals with 6.8 gpas. </p>

<p>xiggi needs to dig this up for us. :-)</p>

324

<p>grading scale in VA is different than in most of the US. 100-93 A, 92-90 B+,
89-84 B, 83-80 C+, 79-74 C, 73-70 D+, 69 below is an F. Also they weight IB/AP only .5.</p>

<p>Get a 92 in an AP course it is a 3.8. My S son hates it, wishes we were back in FL.</p>

325

<p>Quote from the article:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Adding to the stress was all the talking and obsessing. Knowing all his classmates were going through it together made things easier, but the test score comparisons and the buzz — about where people were applying and how so-and-so got into that school while so-and-so didn't — just made things worse. The online forums, too, made it seem like a life-or-death situation.</p>

<p>Jonathan tried not to talk about it too much.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To me, the very thing that Jonathan stressed about....the comparisons made by peers about who got in, who didn't, who had what stats, who didn't, why this or that...is exactly the kind of thing going on here between PARENTS! He tried not to talk about it too much. Well, everyone else in his competitive environment was doing so and this thread is just what he wished to avoid. The very environment that many say has gotten out of hand, is going on right here with the adults. Sorry, but that's how I see it. Lots of picking apart of every little detail and why he did or didn't get in, why he should have or shouldn't have, and so on. Ya know, lots of you very informed parents (and I like y'all a bunch as people), all know that some who get rejected by the likes of Princeton were not rejected because they were not "good enough" but schools like P cannot accept every single kid who is found to be worthy of a spot in the class. Now, whether this kid was truly in contention for a spot and as "good" as the ones they took, we don't know but lots of kids who are denied are every bit as good as those who got in. After all, we see numerous instances of a kid who got into H but not Y and then another kid got into Y but not H, etc. </p>

<p>What's going on here is really starting to make me feel quite discouraged. Maybe I just don't run in circles at home with those who analyze candidates for college or think SATs of 1400 aren't so hot and all this other stuff....oh, he was only val among 40 vals in a school of 4000 or whatever I just read. Yikes, I am so glad my kids were removed from this sort of thing amongst peers AND parents in our area. I just am having trouble stomaching it. I thank my lucky stars my own kid was not in some article like this to be picked apart as to their "worth" for college X or Y, or H or P as the case is, I guess. If I were that family, I would just die listening to this analysis of every book on his table and every activity he ever did and every SAT2 test he ever took and his seemingly incapability of higher level work because he must be pretty dumb with a 1380 SAT....oy, I have to stop reading.....:eek:</p>

<p>This isn't really just discussing "issues"....it is discussing a real kid, with a published name. A regular kid, in my book. An accomplished kid (even without the science research that has many up in arms). A kid like many of your own kids....good grades, good SATs, great rank, lots of ECs of substance....and in fact, colleges, very good colleges, took him. I don't think it was a big mistake! He didn't get into some. Well, surprise surprise. Almost every excellent candidate likely had one or two rejections. I think my own kids were good candidates (I'm a mom, I can say that), and each had just one rejection and one waitlist. No complaints. I don't think Jonathan is complaining either. He done good. Oops, I didn't have a stellar verbal SAT, forgive me for the poor English. How I ever got into grad school at Harvard, I'll never know. I wasn't val; I wasn't top 2%, I didn't have the highest SATs. But I had enough. The "competitive" talk among students that some report exists in their communities when it comes to college, I am observing right here amongst the parents. If Jonathan was stressed before, I can't imagine how he'd feel now reading others pick apart every little aspect of his life and accomplishments. I'd die if a bunch of parents did that about my kid on a public forum. I know it is allowed. But this discussion has gone beyond my comfort level. I'm not sure why I kept reading it. Thank God his parents do not post here. I am wondering if folks would be willing to pick apart everything about one another's kids on here? I just do not think so, not like this.</p>

326

<p>Just a note: I looked up the high school. 2,800 kids. (I feel really guilty about this -- I agree with soozievt, but the "41 valedictorians" got me a little. I don't even like the whole val/sal obsession. My school didn't have that stuff, and I think it turns kids a little ugly. But giving that title to 41 kids -- in addition to NHS and probably countless other such things -- crosses my b.s. line. Remember, though, it isn't the kid's fault, and it doesn't mean he's not a great kid who SHOULD have gotten into P or wherever.)</p>

327

<p>JHS, while I agree the notion of 41 vals is a bit much, it doesn't diminish this kid's accomplishments and like you say, it is not his fault the system set up at his school. We only have one val. My older D happened to be it. For all I know, someone here might pick apart the fact that she went to a rural public HS and go on to say she'd never be at the top of her class if she had gone to "insert some top public or private". I can't say whether she'd be val somewhere else, and surely there are MORE kids like her in schools such as that, but I feel she'd still excel, and in fact, now that she is mixed in with top kids from around the country at her college, she fares absolutely fine. But I can just see how people would pick apart all these things, as with Jonathan. I'm just disappointed to see all this, which reminds me so much of what people say is such a negative in competitive communities and the stress it causes amongst the kids. I see it going on right here! I just can't relate, I guess. I don't think I wanna.</p>

328

<p>"If I were that family, I would just die listening to this analysis of every book on his table"</p>

<p>Soozie, at the risk of repeating an earlier post, this is something the PARENTS should have concerned themselves before accepting to participate in the story. Didn't THEY decide to display the stack of books in an ostentatious manner? Were they afraid readers might miss something? </p>

<p>Just a Louis Bornstine found out, the limelight can shine too brightly on some, even on the chosen ones. The parents put their kid's life and privacy on a tee ... it is bit too late to complain about people taking a swing at it.</p>

329

<p>Susan, I agree with your post #325. I'm just glad I'm not competing with today's VERY accomplished teenagers. I'll just go sit in my rocking chair and reminisce now.</p>

330

<p>afa - Do I understand you correctly? In Va, the highest possible GPA, assuming all above level classes is 4.5? </p>

<p>Btw...be glad you aren't in our district. We have a contrived level, called 'K-level', which used to be 'on level'. K-level is weighted exactly the same as AP and Honors. So most of our top ranked kids have avoided harder APs and Honors classes to protect rank. But, hey it's Texas, home of the 'top ten percent law' and 'one thousand and one ways to beat the top ten percent law'. (I'm gonna try NOT to get started down THIS road...or I'll have to pop another Nexium before I go to bed.)</p>

331

<p>
[quote]
But, hey it's Texas, home of the 'top ten percent law' and 'one thousand and one ways to beat the top ten percent law'.

[/quote]
Or as it's known down here "Bloodsport 200_" insert proper year. "Ties? We don't have no stinkin' ties. Lash them together and give them each a bluebook. Then ask a question and throw 1 pencil into the ring.:eek: That'll do just fine. " </p>

<p>Who says we don't teach Darwin in Texas? Heck, we make our school kids a living exhibit.</p>

332

<p>Suze -- try reading the sidebar on the same page as the article about Jonathan Cross - the part that quotes from Elizabeth Wissner-Gross:
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-08-23-college-admissions_x.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-08-23-college-admissions_x.htm&lt;/a>

[quote]
But getting kids into that dream college starts with raising kids who'll be a college's dream candidate. Parents have to find and create opportunities for kids to develop their interests from a very early age rather than leaving it to the schools, Wissner-Gross says. ...
Grades. You want kids to enjoy learning for its intrinsic value, but you also have to recognize that grades are currency, and grade-point average is very important, she says. "Every opportunity they get starts with their grades." ...
Organization. Rather than berating or belittling your kid for not being organized, Wissner-Gross recommends secretly organizing them.

[/quote]
To some of us this looks like an article about a kid who has been prepped and prodded and packaged. We read the article in the context of what else is on the page, and we see Wissner-Gross's view things and the pictures of the kid and his SAT prep materials.... and we see hype. </p>

<p>A 1380 is a great SAT, but it is not a remarkable one, and it is less remarkable still for a kid coming out of the Fairfax district with a father who is a research scientist, and it is oddly low for an intel finalist; we don't expect to see high school kids who are capable of doing high-level scientific research needing to cram for their math SAT II's either. So it looks to us like an ordinary-bright kid who has been repackaged to look like a genius. </p>

<p>And so what you are seeing in response is the natural skepticism of people who don't buy it, coupled with frustration over the fact that college admissions has become a high-stakes marketing game. We can see the parental hand in all of this and the accompanying Wissner-Gross article pretty much reinforces the sense that this kid is an example of the planning and shaping she is talking about.</p>

333

<p>Xiggi, we just disagree, and that's fine. I can't put this kid in the same category as Blair Hornstine, sorry. She made the news due to the suit about being val and also about plagiarism and so on. This kid was in the news because he was selected as one of the academic all stars by that newspaper....in other words, he was in the news for an achievement....Blair was in the news for the lawsuit about being val and so forth. The news story here appears to be a follow up about one of the winners. The paper likely wanted to profile one of the top academics as an example of what kids like that go through with elite college admissions, sort of like a human interest story about college admissions, but with a face on it. I'm sure the photo shoot was one concocted by the newspaper. Yes, they agreed to be profiled, but considering he was one of the contest winners, I can see how they went along with that. USA Today may have thought there was some college admissions story in this. I say it wasn't a whole lot, but neither are lots of these sorts of articles I see in the paper on this subject. It wan't a meaty article. It wasn't even so much about this kid. I think they were just showing one of the winners and here was a nationally recognized academic "all star" and look, he didn't even get into Princeton. The general public (not CC informed types) tend to think, "top student = entrance into any top college" and this profile showed the angst and stress involved in elite admissions and how even some top students get turned away from top colleges (which for most of us here, is a no brainer). I truly do not think the article was anything more than that. It wasn't a controversy like the Blair Hornstine affair. This is a kid who exceled in his own school. He did not have stellar SATs but he had pretty good ones. He had done a variety of significant ECs. He did some research though he was afforded some opportunities in that field most likely as his father is in it as well (this is NOT so unusual). I don't see any cheating, plagiarism, any fenagling for val status or anything remotely related to the Blair Hornstine case. That was a controversy. This kid ought not to be but I guess people want to pick apart his accomplishments, his worth, his ability to do the work, his right to get into a good college with SATs that are not "tops", and so on. Have at it if you want. I just think it mirrors exactly the competitive atmosphere that some say they wish didn't exist amongst the kids, but it is right here. And I guess it is hard for me to see it, and I do see it on some student threads as well, as it is so foreign to the way both students and parents talk and react in my community.</p>

334

<p>Amen curmudgeon. And they think high school football is rough in Texas.</p>

<p>You know you're swimming with the sharks when the parents start calculating gpas in the summer between 6th and 7th grade, when the kids have their first opportunity to earn high school credits.</p>

335

<p>Calmom, I see your point to a degree but I don't know how packaged the kid really was. Some of his mom's points are not far fetched. Creating opportunities for children outside the school....we've done that...though we never were thinking about college admissions when we found activities but just exposed the kids to enrichment and they picked and chose and requested such activities. They often begged to do them. We found out about and provided opportunities that the school did not.</p>

<p>About grades...I agree with her that kids should learn for learning's sake. However, grades are important because an academic record that is strong can help lead you toward educational goals such as going to college. My kids love to learn. They are very motivated and driven. They choose to challenge themselves because they hate work that is too easy. But while they attended HS, they also knew that if they did well with grades, they would have more doors open for them down the line. I agree with the mom in the article that GPA is important. It is someone's record of academic achievement. It isn't enough, unfortunately, to say, "I love learning" but end up with a 2.9 GPA. Because while colleges love those who love to learn and are motivated to learn, they still care that a student can achieve in the classroom, which is usually demonstrated, at least on paper, by grades. So, yes, grades count. When I was in high school, I wrote my term paper on why I thought schools should not have grades. But indeed they do, so I think a college wants someone who cares deeply about learning for learning's sake, but that person better also have some grades to show achievement as well. </p>

<p>I don't agree with her about secretly organizing a kid but I do think a parent can facilitate and guide a kid who is not organized. I mean I may not agree with everything she says, but it doesn't smack of packaged so much to me as simply parents who are involved in their kids' lives, providing opportunities, reinforcing the importance of doing well in school, goal setting, and so on. Kids who have parents who are involved in their lives, often fare better. Over involvement is an issue, yes. But the quote you gave in your post was not so over the top to me.</p>

<p>Edit: oops, I was just going by your post and not the link and the name "Gross" and "Cross" were so similar that I thought you were quoting the mother, not a "packager" who wrote a book, sorry. Still, while I am not into packaging a student at all, the couple points you quoted were not so far fetched to me or not so "packaging" sounding. The packaging things that really are over the top are having kids chose activities specifically to get into college....like coming up with a game plan to do unique X or Y just to get in, not because of any interest or desire to do it, picking schedules around how it will affect class rank, picking summer programs to look good for college, moving to another geographical area where less applicants to Ivies will live to increase the odds, and lots of other gaming things I have heard about with respect to packagers. But things like getting a good GPA, being organized, providing opportunities for kids to pursue their interests outside of school, are just rather ordinary good parenting to me.</p>

336

<p>Aw, come on xiggi! All the parents did was allow their son to accept being a USA TODAY FIRST TEAM ACADEMIC ALL-AMERICAN! and, as was probably a condition of the honor, agree to be interviewed by a reporter and photographed. Maybe no one even asked them (the kid is probably 18), and they simply failed to absent themselves rudely for the interview. Someone in the school administration probably nominated him because everyone thought he was a great kid who deserved it. The parents didn't hire a publicist or an image consultant. They certainly didn't write the story, and it probably never occurred to them that their son would be the focus of a story like that precisely because he is maybe a little more everyman-normal (and white) than many of the other kids on the "team". </p>

<p>If someone told me one of my kids had been named a USA TODAY FIRST TEAM ACADEMIC ALL-AMERICAN! I would be dumbstruck with pride, and I would soooo be there making coffee for the reporter and photographer and beaming from ear to ear. I agree! My kid is a great kid! I would not have a wisp of guilty conscience, and I wouldn't dream of telling the photographer how I thought he should pose my family -- it's not about me, after all, it's about my USA TODAY FIRST TEAM ACADEMIC ALL-AMERICAN!, and I'm dumbstruck with pride and serving coffee. It would never occur to me until much later that you might wind up hacking into my computer to find out just exactly how much editing I did on the application essays, or that fifty strangers might be blowing up the photograph to tsk-tsk about the sub-800 SAT II scores.</p>

337

<p>Calmom: "it is oddly low for an intel finalist." He was an Intel Science and Engineering Fair finalist, not an Intel Science Talent Search finalist. </p>

<p>There is some overlap between the groups, but there are 1500 ISEF finalists, and only 40 STS finalists. Intel doesn't publish their score information (thank goodness or we'd all be picking it to death), but I would imagine that you have a lot wider score range among 1500 people than you do 40.</p>

338

<p>JHS: I agree...if my kid were chosen in such a national achievement "contest", I'd be proud of her. In this instance, I am glad she didn't apply or wasn't submitted and not in this article because who needs this? REALLY. I sorta recall this competition or one very similar, that her GC wanted to submit her for but she just never got all the stuff together with everything else going on with college applications and her busy life and just did not do it. </p>

<p>I recall my kid being a finalist on a state level for a Wendy's HS Heisman Award. Should she have gone on to some National recognition for such an award, and in some paper, I'd really be turned off by this scrutiny that I am reading here by other parents. One of my kids won a national award and has her bio along with other winners on the website for that award, just not in any national paper or anything. But this kid's award was sponsored by a newspaper and thus featured. I think his parents ought to be proud. I don't think this kid is so unique or amazing but he seems to be accomplished and I am sure it was not easy to be selected for that award. I say bravo to him.</p>

339

<p>JHS, you know what ... I'm changing my mind. </p>

<p>It's really all the fault of shoddy reporting by USA-Today. It is because of the angle chosen by the reporter that we all got thrown into an irrecoverable frenzy.</p>

<p>The article really was a follow-up on the previously announced award. A great story of a great kid from the so-so Fairfax County beating the odds and making it a Duke. </p>

<p>FWIW, here's a thought: separate the mention of Princeton from the story and you DO have a great follow-up story. Actually, there were many other things to add to the story--if that's the angle USA Today wanted. For instance, where was the mention that the kid won the Robertson award and scholarship, easily one of the most prestigious scholarships in the country. I am still so surprised that NOBODY picked on that glaring omission in the article. Full rides at Duke are not that common.</p>

<p>But here's the problem: the story was not about the accomplishment of the kid, but was about NOT making Princeton. Aren't we taught to look for the essence of an article in the first lines? </p>

<p>Lastly, I now believe to have been wrong about the parental role in the research. Too much of a vertical focus.</p>

340

<p>Xiggi, I would agree with you that the slant of the article was one that the reporters/paper chose. I don't even think it was a good slant. I think they thought it might make a story to focus on how he did not get into Princeton (like I said, so many out there think a great student is a shoo in at a top school and so they are showing that it isn't so, though I don't think this kid was devastated by any means and in fact, had some excellent admissions results overall). I don't think this kid is focusing on not getting into P but the paper is! I agree that the paper could have focused on the big scholarship at Duke or other accomplishments but rather tried to make it into a story that they felt would be an interesting twist of sorts. I dunno. I didn't find it that interesting. I think the issue is the paper and their choice of focus. It's not so great but I think the kid is a pretty good student in many ways, and after all, he was a winner to this contest which likely wasn't THAT easy to be. But he isn't THAT unusual. His rejection to P isn't that unusual. </p>

<p>I just think the paper was doing one of these stories about the college admissions frenzy (even the side bar fed into that) and how good students like a USA Today winner, even get rejected to P and yadda yadda. Wasn't so newsworthy. But it is not like the kid contacted the paper to have them write this. It is not like he cheated or tried to game the system like Blair, etc. It is not like he was the subject of some controversy (well, um, not counting the one on this thread, of course, LOL).</p>