<p>My main concern has to do with the part of the article that says that she edits student essays 8 or 10 times.</p>
<p>Maybe I'm living in an ethical dreamland, but while I think that it is an excellent idea to have people read an essay to give feedback and make general comments (or note spelling or grammatical errors), I had the impression that she might do much more than that. I don't have a huge problem with families using a counselor if it makes them more comfortable, eases family tension, helps focus a kid, etc. And if a family wants to spend that type of money and have junior do everything with an eye towards getting into school XYZ, well, that's a choice they can make. And they might end up there--but they did do the activities and the rest. But if the student's work as represented to the school is really substantially done by someone else (because the "editing" is really more than that), that's a problem. It doesn't hurt another kid if Sammy Smith decides to ramp up his involvement in music on the advice of a counselor. But it does hurt if Sammy's essay is well beyond what he would have written. And I don't think colleges can really tell this. It's an honor system and unless someone has low grades in English and/or lousy test scores in this area, a school can't really know.</p>
<p>nimby58: I wholehartedly agree! For this reason I hate to hear that many schools are still ignoring the writing section because it's too new. For years, the SATII in writing was required by most schools, now the writing section is being ignored in favor of essays crafted by who knows who. </p>
<p>I am sure that the vast majority of kids write their own essays with a review for glaring problems by their teacher, parent or peer. That is how it should be. (S1 wouldn't allow anyone to look at his essays as he felt even that was unethical). But, at least to some degree, the SAT writing section can support or refute their essay abilities.</p>
<p>I love the schools that require applicants to submit a recently graded paper from one of their classes with the application. Not only does it give another view into their writing abilities and style, it also offers a window into the grading level of at least one letter grade on the transcript.</p>
<p>When I think of the money I spent on music lessons and music camp for S1 (who asked for them), I might not come up to $40k but it might not be that far off.
But I know any number of parents who pushed their kids to take music lessons without any concern at all as to whether the kids wanted to take those music lessons. The more general point, though, is not about music lessons taken enthusiastically or not, but the subtle messages that families give to their children about their futures. My kids, children of Ph.D.s knew, perhaps from before kindergarten that they would be going to college. They knew, in middle school, that how they performed would have an impact on how they would be placed in high school.
I did not pay a dime for a college advisor. Why should I? My kids were studious by nature, they had good GCs, and here I am, on CC, dispensing advice. :) (And I don't have $40k to spare). But that does not mean that every family has the same dynamics or assets.</p>
<p>Nimby: </p>
<p>The editing was what bothered me, too; not the advice about what book to read, or what activities to pursue.</p>
<p>The impression these articles give though, is not that Michele Hernadez is in the game of giving subtle messages about the importance of working hard and going to college so much as issuing a series of dictats about what you must do to get into a particular college: "don't do track, do beauty pagents" "don't do economics, do classics" "don't go to this high school, go to that one" "don't write about this, write about that" </p>
<p>She comes across not as the paid-for equivalent of the interested parent so much as the paid-for equivalent of the overly-involved parent. The kind we all hear stories about who live vicariously through their children's achievements, unable to accept anything that doesn't fit with their own expectations and preconceived ideas of what constitutes success in life.</p>
<p>Perhaps she is misrepresented by people looking for a sensational article. Perhaps her approach doesn't focus just on outcomes and not on experiences. Perhaps it isn't so much to do with indoctrinating middle schoolers with a "win at all costs, and this is the only thing worth winning" attitude but instead teaches them only that if you do certain things now, there will be an impact further down the line. I don't know, I have never done any college counseling and found her book so wildly depressing about my own chances that I stopped reading it. But her approach certainly comes across in all these articles as anything but subtle, and perhaps if I was paying $40,000 for it, I wouldn't be very happy with subtle anyway.</p>
<p>Thanks MOWC for reminding me of the real person behind the hype. I must admit that the figures thrown around in the article threw me.</p>
<p>This kind of counseling certainly does nothing to level the playing field of college admissions, but that is not a new phenomenon.</p>
<p>The article raises a lot of questions about how far kids need to go to package themselves, but that is not Michele Hernandez's doing; it's a function of the prevailing culture.</p>
<p>Marite: I agree with you that the US is missing the boat, particularly in math and science education. But that's not quite the same thing as choosing things in Middle School for their appearance.</p>
<p>I have a bit of this in me (elitism -- I'll admit it) and I am glad both my kids resisted me. I wonder if the kids that are counsseling for these sums are more compliant than my kids?</p>
<p>My kids wrote their own essays and would not have allowed anything past very basic input because they wanted their own voices to be heard. They considered that more important ultimately than the school label. I wonder if the counseled kids walk away with a sense of themselves or just a sense of the school they were able to get into? Just a question.</p>
<p>To me the fault lies in a system that will support this kind of industry. Michelle responded to a demand in the market. </p>
<p>What bothers me is how a parent KNOWS in middle school what type college is right for their kid. I would have NEVER expected my academic daughter to wind up as a budding opera singer/Episcopal priest! I also would not have expected to have some of the problems we had with child number 2, who despite those wound up at one of those "coveted" Ivys, from which he went AWOL freshman year he hated it so much. (soph year is much better) Maybe other families have a more predictable and smoother path, but I think you have to have the flexibility to roll with things.</p>
<p>Again, at the risk of boring Americans, in most other countries, a child's path in life is pre-determined even before middle school. When I was approaching middle school, i.e. when I was in the French equivalent of 5th grade, my parents thought I should be a doctor or engineer. These were well paid, high status, secure positions. So they wanted me to go into the math or science track. At that point, I was a good student in all subjects. Thank goodness my teachers strongly suggested I go into classics. My parents quite reluctantly agreed to let me go into that track. I was 11 at the time. Eventually, it turned out that I was not so great at math or science, and I happened to love classics, history and literature. </p>
<p>"What is best" is often equated with "what is most prestigious." And in middle school, that is the only yardstick a family has to go by. Only by junior or senior year does "what is best" assume a more concrete meaning in terms of size, academic and social fit, and geographical location. At that point, HYPSM may well be replaced by a LAC, a music conservatory, an art school, etc... </p>
<p>
[quote]
Maybe other families have a more predictable and smoother path, but I think you have to have the flexibility to roll with things.
<p>I think that early packaging is one of the problems.</p>
<p>Like MOW, if one had looked at my son in 6th grade, one would have expected him to be applying ED to MIT, since he showed such early proclivity in math and sciences. No way, in a million years, would we have been expecting to head down a conservatory route. Had we pidgeon holed him early, we would have prevented him from finding that which made him truly passionate.</p>
<p>I know there are lots of other kids who come to their heart's desires even later. Having an outsider be such an influential decision maker in a young child's life just seems wrong to me on every single level, not the least of which is that she could be totally and completely wrong.</p>
<p>I wouldn't like the level of intrusion either, but that may be a personal thing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I know there are lots of other kids who come to their heart's desires even later. Having an outsider be such an influential decision maker in a young child's life just seems wrong to me on every single level, not the least of which is that she could be totally and completely wrong.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If the criticism is that "outsiders" should not be involved in molding a child's life as early as middle school, I'm afraid it is done all the time, when teachers recommend that a child be placed in a CP or Honors track, that a child be in Algebra I or Algebra II.</p>
<p>Parents, too, can be wrong. Mine were. I am thankful my teachers knew my abilities far better than my parents whose ideas of a desirable career for me was not based on observation of my interests but on social expectations. I know any number of young people whose parents steered them into majors they don't particularly care for because those majors are preparation for better paying careers.</p>
<p>That is a very different issue from retaining a college counselor, or how much such a counselor should charge, and what function a counselor should play.</p>
<p>Speaking about real dollars, is it smart for a family to spend an average of 10,000 per annum for a K-12 private education and then follow a DIY formula in a subject they know little about? How does that compare to a situation where the same family is blessed to have a very good public K-12 system at no cost? Is there merit to parlay the 120,000 to 150,000 savings and hire a highly priced and highly prized specialist such a Michele Hernandez.</p>
<p>Do we have the same profound distate for high priced specialist outside the education industry? What is the cost of spending a few hours in the ER, let alone a few days? For instance, I missed my college orientation because I spend 7 days in ICU. The total cost of my little vacation was more than 3 years at the most expensive school in the country. Why do people hire expensive attorneys when the issues really matter? After all, there are many pro bono clinics and the internet is filled to the rim with free advise on medical issues. </p>
<p>The reality is that everything has a price and a value. Who are we to decide that the services offered by consultants are not worth their price, or even worse repulsive and offensive? Isn't the true value established by the people who ... pay for those services? Aren't there parents who spent 8 to 10 years keeping their children on a sport traveling team in hope of landing a sport at a "fitting" school or land an elusive scholarship. Is the total cost that may be as high as 40,000 an investment or a waste? Are the kids also victimized by packaging of a different form? </p>
<p>In the end, the beauty remains in the eye of the beholder, and so does the value. For some, the services of MH are a bargain since they money spend represent a fraction of their earning power. Why would a divorce lawyer who charges 450 per hour waste his time reading this site when he can hire another specialist who will alwasy be better?</p>
<p>A final thought: how do we reconcile the consensus opinion of this forum that the books written by Michele Hernandez are the best in their genre to an opinion that her paid services are possibly nefarious to the students?</p>
<p>Thanks all for the mostly respectful comments to my article. I thought I'd respond directly to some points and as Mom of wild Child knows, I used to frequent these forums quite a bit to help people (no charge :-) I wasn't all that happy with the BW article for many reasons - they distorted quite a lot of things to make it appropriate for BW. For example - why not mention all the pro bono work I've done with KIPP Academy in NY for the past several years? I've helped many inner city kids realize their dreams and attend Ivy level schools who never thought they could. And $40 is a FIVE YEAR PACKAGE and includes literally hundreds of hours of contact time - if I billed like lawyers by the hour, it would be off the charts. I work with a small number of students each year. And interestingly, many of those I work with are from immigrant families, not all wealthy families. Many attend my boot camps as well and I provide a valuable service. Regarding "telling kids what to do," that is NOT my job and that info is just wrong. I encourage kids to follow their passions. KIDS are the ones who tend to do things because they "think it looks good for college." I have them do more unusual things that they are excited about, but didn't think looked good. The article simplified a great deal about my involvement. As for essays, I am an English teacher by background - I don't write anything for my students - I help them express their own voice about what they are passionate about and work with them as a good editor would. All is in their words. I'm very strict about that. Other "essay" companies write essays FOR kids, but I am on a totally different ethical plane. I welcome conversation and am happy to answer questions, but if you just want an ad hominem attack, I'm not up for that. Thanks to those who realize that there is a person behind these numbers. 10 years ago that person was a single mom who had just been fired from a job and was collecting unemployment from the state of Florida for many months. It's a shame that when a female business person "makes" it and is self confident, she's "arrogant" while men who do the same thing are good businessmen, and aggressive, not "*****y." All who know me would say I'm a caring mother of two young children, family oriented person, and make myself available 24/7 for my clients. I'm appreciate to all who have given me a chance to vent a bit and express my dismay at the business orientation of parts of the article, but that's what BW is about. Happy to listen, help and advise. Michele</p>
<p>Thanks for telling us your side. My experience with newspaper stories such as that one tells me there are too many reporters out to make a sensational story, rather than a factual one.</p>
<p>MH
Thanks for posting. I was harsh in my criticism of you trying to program kids from middle school onwards. Too often I hear parents say that only 5-6 professions are acceptable, and they will only pay for select private schools. If you are able to expand expectations, I give you credit.</p>
<p>I was laissex-faire in regard to parenting. My S was self-directed and didn't seek my opinions on courses, ECs, and prep time (barely any) for SATs and the like. I saw too many power struggles within families, and never wished to go that route.</p>
<p>M, thanks for your input. Personally, your first book really opened my eyes to the competitive nature of college admissions. I believe it was one of the first to reveal what happened in committee and how students are evaluated. Your book provided an invaluable service to both students and families, at a very reasonable price!</p>
<p>I agree with the posters who see using the services of any counselor as ONE option to help their children reach their potential. When I think of what we've spent on music lessons over the years for two kids, it probably approaches $75 K and neither will be a professional musician. Or what we've spent on private K -12 education. </p>
<p>Although we only relied on books and CC, I don't see anything wrong in using the talents and professional abilites of an expert, who spends a great deal of time and effort in understanding the process. As a SAHM, I was able to learn about the admissions process, and counsel my kids accordingly. Not everyone has that time.</p>
<p>The truth is, I don't try to program kids at all. I try to make them consider what it is they really WANT to do and how to make that fit with their goals. I'm not some kind of crazy autocrat who micromanages families. In fact, someone above confused me with another counselor who was responsible for the Harvard plagiarism girl - I would never "get" a kids book published through my connections -that's unethical. I always maintain my own very high personal ethical standard to all that I do. And as I tell people, I offer many lower priced services (including the $10 each of my books costs) so everyone can afford my advice to some extent. It takes lots of time to write books and I've done 4, so I always make an effort to make the process of admissions more transparent. That's what got me in trouble when I wrote my first book! I appreciate all your comments - it's always good to take what you read with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>MH: Thanks for the first-hand clarifications; sometimes we need to go back to our childhood and remember the game of telephone. If any of my comments were incorrect, I apologize.</p>
<p>I have read your books cover to cover and do appreciate your sharing your professional knowledge of the entire process with those of us who choose to go it on our own with books, college admissions visits and fellow CCers. Thanks!</p>
<p>What bothered me the most about the article wasn't what YOU were doing, but how parents of children who were already advantaged (private schools, lots of lessons, travel, tons of experiences) were paying for another advantage. I am heartened to hear that you have devoted time and talent to kids whose parents wouldn't have the money or the wherewithal to employ you.</p>
<p>As a mother of two very successful daughters, I should have been wiser about taking the article at face value. I have witnessed first hand that we are much harsher on a young woman who is, gasp, ambitious. </p>
<p>Once again, I am sorry for my flippant remarks.</p>
<p>Michelle, although it is disheartening to know about the advantages some of your clients will get due to their personal affluence and motivated, informed parents, I think it is notable that I was printing out the BW article before I even saw your response. So..thank you for A is for Admission, the lucidity in the text and the contribution you have made for "transparency" in the process. My son attended a school with a 50% drop-out rate and abysmal, non-existent guidance counseling. Your book helped him at get a "better late than never" rough guess of what the real expectations and odds were, and helped him gather the courage to enter the game. I do think your books are indeed a bargain in value for those of us who are for a variety of reasons both naive and uninformed about highly selective colleges, and in a sense you did serve a function in his "guidance counseling." He had great outcomes, was prepared for the waitlist he received, and had an outlook that made sense just in time.</p>