<p>I don’t think those professors, even at Princeton, could afford those private schools - $30K+/year/student.</p>
<p>Hello. Long-time lurker, first-time poster here. (And by long-time lurker, I mean addicted to CC for about 2 years but never posted until now.)</p>
<p>I’m an alumna of Gunn and now a college freshman (so, of course, not a parent). The Palo Altans and Bay Area posters on this thread have pretty much said it all, but there are some things that could be cleared up.</p>
<p>Gunn is not unusual among Bay Area high schools. Yes, there are students who go to Stanford, and there are lots who go to Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, USC, NYU, Pomona, and (insert name of any Ivy or Ivy-equivalent here). The roughly half who don’t go to lower-tier UCs, Cal States, and yes, community college. But Gunn is not even in the top 50 high schools nationally. Among Bay Area high schools, the stats posted by the OP are not unusual. Other Bay Area high schools such as Harker (an expensive prep school for which I have seen a few threads here on CC), Monta Vista, Paly, Mission San Jose, and Homestead fare just as well and sometimes better. The topic of this thread could be changed to Bay Area high schools or even simply good high schools in general, and it wouldn’t make a difference.</p>
<p>The stats are indeed mostly a consequence of its close proximity to Stanford. Many students apply because it’s nearby and they like the sunny California weather. There are also families who move to Palo Alto so that their kids can be in an excellent school district, and maybe, if they’re lucky, get admitted to that nice local university over there (and hey, it seems to be a good school!). Yes, the kids are very smart. But Gunn does not have a competitive environment, and it is not clique-y. In fact, when I first started as a freshman there, I was amazed at how supportive and friendly everyone was. People talk freely about their grades and test scores to each other. They collaborate on group projects and studying. They complain to each other about how many AP exams they have to study for and the intensity of badminton practice the other day or their swim/cross-country times. But, from what I’ve seen for the most part, there are no tiger parents in the picture. Most of the students come from privileged backgrounds, and, if anything, are sometimes just a little bit spoiled, though only from permissive parents, not wealth. Although some parents may be CEOs and such of Silicon Valley tech companies, most families have both parents working as doctors and engineers. Even then, such a salary is barely enough in Palo Alto to pay the mortgage (or rent) on the typical 1950’s Eichler-style houses (like ugly bungalows) that go for $1-2+ mill on the market. (I think of Palo Alto as your stereotypical yuppie town.) But my point is, there are often, but probably not always, no Stanford faculty involved.</p>
<p>Regarding the recent suicide cluster that was mentioned, I do not believe it was from family problems, as the OP stated. (I personally knew the first kid; it was awful.) Gunn has had its share of sad news coverage from the suicides, subsequent Westboro protest, and a few other unfortunate events. But the vast majority of students are not depressed, though I will admit they are often stressed out. The suicides all happened at the same location and in the same manner. So perhaps they really are lemmings…</p>
<p>I apologize for my long rant and my somewhat-biased talk about my own high school (other parents/students can talk forever about their high schools, too!). But I do have to wonder why one high school’s stats are mentioned; they are not unusual - not in the U.S., and certainly not in the Bay Area. What I’ve mentioned about the nature of the students at Gunn applies also to most Bay Area high schools.</p>
<p>Everyone has a slightly different school experience, but I am shaking my head in amusement at the assertion that “there are no tiger parents.” (in Palo Alto) –
Palo Alto is FILLED with tiger parents, VERY strong-minded parents who will do ANYTHING in their quest to get the best-perceived university offers, and it starts incredibly early and involves “winning” in every possible way over peers. The naive, those new to the area, or those who follow their own way in life serendipitously get RUN OVER here.
“no Stanford faculty involved” --?
current ranking of lower than #50 –
When I attended Gunn, I recall it was ranked #12 in the nation (ok, long ago, and I can’t recall who did the ranking!), yet it contained a lot of faculty kids, MANY of whom applied to and were accepted to Stanford.</p>
<p>I did not say that there are absolutely no tiger parents; I just said that I have not experienced any. I am sure there may be some, but many students do not seem to have signs of having tiger parents. As I already mentioned, the students at Gunn seem to be privileged and sometimes sheltered (though not always). I have had friends who even demand things of their parents and develop tempers when they do not get them. The vast majority of students are remarkably well-mannered, but they are accustomed to well-educated, but probably not high-income, lifestyles. The overall attitude seems to be in judging themselves based upon their also-privileged peers who may live across the street and not from a broader perspective - that is, the rest of the world. (The same could be said for most of us in the U.S.) Also, many of the students are free-ranging. Many of the boys seem to be well-versed in the latest video games, and many girls are very artsy. (Please don’t tell me that true tiger parents would allow their kids to major in arts and humanities in college, though many Gunn alumni do.) Also, upperclassmen don’t like to be caught dead with the full contingent of seven classes and usually opt for at least one “prep period,” and sometimes two. (After Gunn had changed the rule a few years back saying that no more than two prep periods are allowed; some had even three prep periods and only four classes.) I could go on: the parking lot is like the usual high school’s - it has skid marks from cars full of teens blasting loud music and squealing across lanes. And, like I said, not everyone matriculates at a tier-one college. Tiger parents, not even those who cannot afford higher tuition, generally would not allow their kids to go to community college. And I have met some parents. They want their kids to do their very best and to get into what they think is the best-fit (which yes, sometimes means best) school; if the students do not quite perform at the 4.5-GPA-2400-SAT-eight-APs level, they simply throw their hands up and settle for whatever is possible. I’m sure there may be tiger parents, but again, I haven’t seen them. And certainly most Gunn parents are not tiger parents.</p>
<p>One thing that has been of some concern at the school is the unusually large education gap. Students are usually one of two crowds, the high-achievers and the average-achievers. The high-achievers all tend to know (or know of) each other but know few students in the other crowd, and vice versa. What has brought the school up are the high-achievers, which are very high-achievers indeed, outweighing the average-achievers. Yet what I have just said about the students applies more from my experience of the high-achievers and not the average-achievers.</p>
<p>As for the Stanford faculty, such families may live closer to the campus in North Palo Alto or in Stanford, CA, which is owned by the university and restricted only to faculty and students. Their children would then attend Paly and not Gunn. Generally, Paly is known to be slightly less academic and more athletic than Gunn. I personally think this is because North Palo Alto (Paly district) is more laid-back and comfortable, with its multi-million-dollar mansions, while South Palo Alto (Gunn district) is filled with lower-income minority (usually Asian) families who teach their kids to struggle for better lives. I haven’t seen much of the presence of Stanford parents at Gunn, though, again, that doesn’t mean there aren’t any.</p>
<p>Again, students are Gunn are very academically-inclined; there’s no questioning about that. There are some who’ve taken BC Calc before senior year, even as early as freshman year, and who go on to specialized Stanford math classes. There are some who take eight AP exams in May and some who have astronomical GPAs. Some do PHP and Java programming for fun, and some participate (and do very well) in national math and science competitions. Some do research at Stanford. Some weld robots for the school FIRST team. Some come out on top in state track meets. And yes, many students matriculate at Stanford, Caltech, MIT, or Ivies (enough that no one is too impressed with hearing the name “Harvard” anymore). But they are generally not pressured to the breaking-point, and they do have a lot of fun in high school. They simply come from well-educated (or hard-working immigrant) backgrounds, and this is often not because of affiliations with Stanford.</p>