<p>For Girls, It's Be Yourself, and Be Perfect, Too</p>
<p>Fascinating article in the education section of The New York Times:</p>
<p>ok- I'll bite... (against my better judgement???? )</p>
<p>having been blessed with one of each, what I found is that the expectation for each was the same.... "be yourself, do your best, and be as perfect as you can" just about sums it up. </p>
<p>The competetion for college was equally as gruelling...wait, let me change that.... it was equally as challenging, based on the demands of the schools they chose and the admission requirements of each....but in this regard, I would have to say the selection process was easier for one than the other. And both were recruited athletes.</p>
<p>One might assume it was easier for our son, but the truth is it was easier for our daughter.... female athletes are a tad less in number, thus one has better odds to to "stand out" in the crowd, unlike our son, by far the more superior athlete, who was in a crowd of other superior athletes, all competeting for a very limited number of spots.</p>
<p>Is life unfair??? Guess it's all a matter of how you look at it, and from what perspective and through what lens.</p>
<p>The bottom line is that the story can be arugued from either side- just as effortlessly, just as compelling. We all have our bias!</p>
<p>(and if you thing girls are the only ones worrying about their weight or "looking good," I have cartons of hair gel and cologne and nutritional suppliments I can send you from a male mid who can't use any of them right now!!!! :) )</p>
<p>
[quote]
But being an amazing girl often doesn’t feel like enough these days when you’re competing with all the other amazing girls around the country who are applying to the same elite colleges that you have been encouraged to aspire to practically all your life.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Big woop. It's the same for boys, too. This is news? :confused:</p>
<p>Is it a bad thing that top colleges and universities only want the best? </p>
<p>Is it a bad thing that employers are even MORE picky because, as opposed to universities that get paid BY the applicant, THEY are going to be the ones PAYING the applicant?</p>
<p>Is it a bad thing that these kids are learning that the best rise to the top, that the rest don't, and that it's best to be among the best?</p>
<p>Is it a bad thing for kids to learn that life is not what they see on this week's episode of "Friends", but rather a dog-eat-dog existence where natural selection is the brutal norm?</p>
<p>Is it a bad thing for a kid to expect to excel in those things they are naturally good at, and to want to excel at those things they find challenging? Is it bad for society to demand less than that from them?</p>
<p>In short, is it bad for them to learn that life isn't always fair?</p>
<p>It seems to me that these girls, going beyond their very impressive HS records, are learning a very stark lesson in reality. Good for them. I am quite certain that most will succeed because, unlike so many of their counterparts in other places or with different mindsets, they've worked hard and risen to be the best among their group. Their opportunities will "present themselves" not out of chance, but as a result of their hard work. "Luck" is more often when preparation meets opportunity than the haphazard force it is usually described as.</p>
<p>Some of you may recall one of my earliest threads (whether with fondness or bitterness is irrelevant to me) where I reminded the new Plebers that no one cared anymore that their HS class rank was top 1%, or that their GPA was 3.99, or that they were Student Body President, or that they had earned 3 Varsity Letters, or if they had done 9 ECA's. Why? Simple! No one cares anymore because EVERYONE there has done that! YOU'RE NOT SPECIAL ANYMORE!</p>
<p>One of my favorite USNA t-shirts is inscribed with the legend: "Destiny is not a matter of CHANCE, it is a matter of CHOICE!"</p>
<p>Welcome to reality, folks. Darwinism works on a societal level as well as a biological one.</p>
<p>What I find REALLY humorous is that the NYT actually thinks THIS qualifies as news! :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I definitely agree, Z.</p>
<p>Z- my thoughts exactly!!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
"What I find REALLY humorous is that the NYT actually thinks THIS qualifies as news!"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yea, some scoop. Real trouble is that a great many will believe it is, just because of where they read it.</p>
<p>Try and guess the gender of the author!</p>
<p>From the Study for Wealth and Inequality at ISERP and the Chair of the Sociology Department at Columbia University:</p>
<p>Family dynamics often play an important role in college success.</p>
<p>usna09mom</p>
<p>I wonder how many University of Florida and Ohio State basketball players graduate in four years, or for that matter ever?</p>
<p>duh. Another vitae-padding, refereed journal article or 10 generated from grandma's conventional wisdom. Might we wonder the amount of the taxpayer-subsidized grant to confirm that ...</p>
<p>Since the middle of the 20th century, higher education has become increasingly femininocentric (and away from its historical traditions of being male dominated). And thus the rules for success are designed best for those who are feminine or like-minded. </p>
<p>Conversely, as has been shown in many studies, even academic research, while it's always best to have that union card degree and those who have such are most likely to make alot more $$ over their lifetimes and have more professional opportunity, there is little and no correlation betwee academic success and worldly success. In other words, good to have a sheepskin, but getting A's vs. the gentlemanly C has little value in forecasting which student will have the greatest achievement ... aside from (you can guess) ... academic type pursuits. Being a professor, academic researcher, college pres.</p>
<p>And to unsna09mom's possible point ...</p>
<p>And as Jesus Christ and the Beatles affirmed, all we need is love. The right kind.</p>
<p>
[quote]
there is little and no correlation betwee academic success and worldly success. In other words, good to have a sheepskin, but getting A's vs. the gentlemanly C has little value in forecasting which student will have the greatest achievement.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What do you call the guy who graduated last in his in medical school class?</p>
<p>"Doctor".</p>
<p>In other words, WP is right in that academic pedigree alone only goes so far. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that the SA's are a possible exception to that rule simply because so much more than just academic grades go into the mix, but even then the underlying point stands.</p>
<p>I've known PhD's who were absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to work with and who were an incredible detriment to every single team they were assigned to. By the same token, I've known people without a degree that were smarter and more effective in every capacity you can think of when compared to some of the degreed folks. BTW, this is out in the REAL world, not in the sheltered ivory towers of academia.</p>
<p>I, for one, am sick to the teeth of all the excuses being bandied about for differences in performance, be it in college, in the workplace, in the sports arena, or anywhere else. I don't buy the idea that just because you grew up poor means you have to stay that way, or that just because your school didn't have computers gives you the right to remain computer illiterate, or that just because you're a woman that somehow the very best cannot be expected of you. </p>
<p>This is AMERICA, damn it! If you can't succeed here it's because YOU DON'T WANT TO! As a country we have always (with apologies to Clint) adapted, improvised, and overcome. If we hadn't we'd still be a bunch of damned colonies rather than the lone superpower on Earth (a fact that some nitwits actually seem to find problematic, which just goes to show how inept our education system has become). You don't have the talent to be a doctor? Fine! Go out and be the BEST you can be at whatever it is YOU are GOOD at!</p>
<p>You want to get ahead? NEWS FLASH: It's up to YOU. From another favorite movie: "If you do not succeed in life, I don't want you to blame your parents! I don't want you to blame the white man! I want you to blame YOURSELVES! The responsibility is YOURS!"</p>
<p>Stop blaming everyone else for YOUR failures or for the challenges you face. Stop looking to others to help you where you should be helping yourself. Get off your ass and WORK! Don't tell me it can't be done: I managed to get two Masters degrees in parallel while simultaneously working full-time AND having a family. Don't tell me it requires money: my Bachelors and both Masters degrees were "free" monetarily, but I WORKED MY TAIL OFF to get into those programs. Whether you like it or not, Clarence Thomas rose from poverty to the Supreme Court. Steve Jobs started in a garage. So did Bill Gates. Tom Clancy was an obscure insurance salesman before he rolled the dice on a book. If they can do it, why can't you?</p>
<p>They keep pouring poison into the ears of those they claim to want to help. How pathetic is it that an entire segment of our society looks DOWN on educational achievement as a dis to their "struggle"? How abhorent is it that we have to lower standards in so many places in the name of "diversity", yet are shocked when the result is a LOWER quality of output?</p>
<p>I can rant about this for hours. It is SICK that we DON'T challenge people to be THEIR BEST anymore, and instead coddle them for their weaknesses. Unless this trend is reversed soon, we are sunk.</p>
<p>Of course, most of the morons who espouse all this PC hypersensitivity crap would welcome that. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>DITTO's to all of the above and most especially to Whistle Pig's final comment. The one thing that stands out the most to me and makes the biggest difference is Parental LOVE, SUPPORT, and INVOLVEMENT, as evident based on all the parents participating on these threads. Our greatest gift to our children is a foundation of LOVE and BELIEF. If they have a solid foundation to jump from they tend to jump higher more often and in turn reach greater heights. Male or female the child that has SOMEONE to believe in them will take more risks. Those most successful (not famous) in our society are those who are willing to take a chance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The one thing that stands out the most to me and makes the biggest difference is Parental LOVE, SUPPORT, and INVOLVEMENT,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I could not agree with you more!!!!</p>
<p>I think the keyword to the above is support. Love and involvement can be good- but everything in moderation. Love is great, but sometimes some parents may be considered overbearing or otherwise a little bit intrusive. I think something good aside from being involved is to take a step back and let the child make some decisions for bad or good but to protect them not when they're falling, but somewhere between the fall and the bottom of things.</p>
<p>As per the article, I was miffed and a bit irritated. There are a lot of outstanding kids and some who are mediocre and some who could do with more attention and others who were simply not suited for a full bachelor's who may have been fine with an associate degree.</p>
<p>I will say that the feeling of perpetual alienation drove me to succeed. Sure, when I was about 8 I decided that I'd aim for MIT and be a programmer just like Dad (I was sooo Daddy's super nerdy little girl) and I got as far as submitting an application to MIT and all that jazz (my goals of course changed along the way) </p>
<p>I really think that kids from my school that did well wanted to not for a school but for themselves by pursuing what made them happy. I'm not talking about the cum laude kids who went to Tier 1 schools or other very prestigious institutions, but I speak for everyone else who got accepted to a school that they loved. I think people have it wrong when they measure success with dollar figures. You could be rich like the celebrities and end up in detox for drug addiction while someone like my Great Aunt lives very modestly and is 105 and has all of her biological facilities (she's still sharp as a tack too!) and she's happy as a clam.</p>
<p>I also don't like when the article mentions that it's such a big deal that the girl is taking 3APs total or something. APs don't measure the student. GPA first for most colleges, then SAT, but then there's extra curric and even then, colleges can't always determine spirit or determination. The average APs taken per kid at my school is 3 with an average AP score of probably a 3.5 for all APs taken with a 98% passing rate. That was never our selling point when I was a freshman-sophomore. We valued that we had "everything" like we had the basic academics, pretty good sports teams, an excellent art program which is still expanding mostly in photo and video, we have a lot of student run services for other students such as tutoring and peer guidance and a lot of other things not available to most schools. Of course lately it's been all about the numbers and percentiles... which to me is disappointing.</p>
<p>In all honesty though, I did everything in secret of my parents and most of my peers due to a lack of support from others. Perhaps that is why I am skewed more in favor of introspective improvement. At least I did what I loved and at the end of the day I can give myself a pat on the back before bed.</p>