<p>^depends on what your characterization of "mediocre" is</p>
<p>Teachers generally don't teach. They mostly say do this. Not why you should do it. Most work is busy work. Lack of freedom. Horrible administartions at all. Students might be of high quality but the education is not up to par. i havent leanred anything in 4 years</p>
<p>Is Stuy that different from other NYC specialized HS's like Bklyn. Tech or SI Tech ?</p>
<p>
[quote]
yay public schools! yay for an SAT average of 1950!!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's actually really, really high.</p>
<p>enderkin, I find it highly doubtful that just by rote memorization, the students can learn the mechanics and do well on the SAT. You make it sound like it is not at all impressive. I doubt that you can do that with a foreign language. </p>
<p>These kids are smart. They are the most brilliant in South Korea. They truly understand the english language (even if it is not native to them) and do well on standardized tests. If you look at KLMA curriculum, they have more english courses than most other private high schools here in US. And most students there take AP English courses and do well on it. Even if the students at first learn english by rote memorization, they eventually understand concepts and if educated enough, they master it. </p>
<p>English is my 2nd language. I started by mechanical memorization of english vocabulary words since 3rd grade, but now I set the curves in my AP english class. Do you actually think my fluency is all from rote memorization? </p>
<p>KLMA also has an english only policy like someone here said. The students are trained to become perfectly fluent in english language. It is not rote memorization that allows them to achieve fluency, rather it is the constant exposure to such english-oriented environment that they get good enough to outperform most students here in standardized tests on english.</p>
<p>Well... I've just received a CC infraction point for my rather violent expressions of opinion regarding KLMA on this other thread so I'll keep it low tone...</p>
<p>KLMA and all the other private Korean foreign language schools are the best because they receive the best students from a huge pool of competitive middle schoolers. I don't think comparing schools is appropriate in this case as the two schools have different educational focuses and pools of selection. I don't think scores or college acceptance rates qualifies any school as "better" than another.</p>
<p>Gryffon5147, I don't think anyone here said KLMA is "better" than Stuy or any other school. I just pointed out the fact that their academics by most measures are the best in the world. The thread just got off track and instead of talking about Stuy, we were having a discussion about KLMA.</p>
<p>I can't believe I read this entire thread. -_- </p>
<p>I hate contention.</p>
<p>in response I say:
Yeah they do. Ever heard of teh math and science aptitude test (sooneung the acronym for soohak gwahak neungruek pyongka sihum). Teachers in SK I think care more than the average US public school teacher. THEY PREPARE YOU IN SCHOOL. Ultimately in SK, you can get that 4.0 GPA but crap sooneung score=crap college. So they have practice tests and prep sessions etc in school. I ono about you guys but I've met ONE teacher that does overtime because he loves his students. There are many in SK. </p>
<p>i agree with collegehopeful78. I like my school best. YAY HUNTER. STUYVESANT. is SO overrated. Because everyone who can't keep up at my school go there ::rolls eyes::
I still wanna KMLA ~</p>
<p>"I don't think anyone here said KMLA is "better" than Stuy." GPAx213
Guess what! You're wrong. I just did. All of my posts say so. Here's my logic.
Stuy<hunter<kmla therefore="" by="" law="" of="" syllogism="="> Stuy<KMLA. </hunter<kmla></p>
<p>I believe KMLA is the most superior school in the world because they've only recently started flooding the ivies. To achieve like ~10% of all grads into ivies is a HUGE accomplishment for a school that's only just started ivy feeding. That's my two cents. </p>
<p>I agree with Gryffon5147. You can't compare KMLA and Stuy because KMLA is so much better. </p>
<p>and now I bet someone will say then, "why don't cha?" Because it is too late. They do not accept anyone past a sophmore in high school and I will never keep up. So I stay.</p>
<p>Take a look at RJC from Singapore (<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/24644-look-high-sch-s-college-admission-rate-shocking.html?%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/24644-look-high-sch-s-college-admission-rate-shocking.html?</a>) Plus, school fees are only US$15 a month XD</p>
<p>I kind of resent Stuyvesant. I go to another, smaller public school, Lab, and while we get one floor in a small, dingy building we have to share with two other schools, they seem to get everything: a brand-new building, all the AP classes, tons of attention from the media and the outside world, interesting extracurriculars, a POOL. Where do they get all that money from? And shouldn't there be a public option that offers resources like Stuyvesant does to people who do better in a smaller school with more individual attention? Not every smart kid in the city goes to Stuyvesant, and I feel like the ones that don't because they didn't want to shell out $900 preparing for the biased admissions test are getting severely marginalized...</p>