<p>I do not see how you can interpret my comments as being derogatory of grade conscious students. I wish all students would want to improve their work so as to go from an A- to an A (and that applies to my own S). What I think colleges do not want is a student who decided to take less challenging classes in high school for the sole purpose of getting a better grade in the class. That does not mean that adcoms expect students to kill themselves taking all APs and college classes.<br>
I've just finished talking to my S about the importance of having a balanced set of classes, by the way.</p>
<p>We have a teacher at our school who says the school prides itself on having "breathless and sleepless kids who are excellent." Then, the parents sit in lectures at the school hearing experts tell us to make our kids get more sleep. We wonder how to do this when the school has an incredibly demanding sports program (kids don't get home until 8 pm) and an onerous program of homework/testing (kids are routinely up until 2 am...and they are very very very smart). There are so many mixed messages and our school takes NO responsibility for the stressed, sleep-deprived, angry and frustrated students. Blithely, they warble on about "love of learning." How can you love learning when it's like drinking from a fire hydrant? We just heard another talk about how these students who work and work and work are then supposed to look at second tier colleges to relieve their evident stress.<br>
Colleges then take the survivors of this program. Somehow, they believe that the truly brilliant will have just sailed through high school with time enough to spare....time they spent curing cancer, playing at Tanglewood and running in the Olympics. This pressure to be superhuman has costs: fraud (see Intel threads), depression, psychological disorders and, I predict, the next generation will be the most hedonist yet...adults trying to recapture their youths misspent at Kumon and soccer tournaments. They will be angry at their parents and angry at their schools (forget the alum dollars, guys).<br>
I know that Jones sees all this. She can't just implement change from one day to the next..it's much more complicated than that...it will take a few years. But it is a step in the right direction and every small step counts. We need the visionaries like her who identify what is wrong with the process and start the dialogue to correct it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How can you love learning when it's like drinking from a fire hydrant?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Excellent way to sum up the craziness in a nutshell.</p>
<p>I disagree about Jones being a visionary. I think it is plain common sense to bring sanity to the process. 99% of the world realizes this. Jones is one of the few who can change it on an institutional level. (We can all change it as individuals by refusing to play the game, consequences be damned. That's my plan.) But she hasn't exactly revolutionized things, has she? Baby steps is all she's been courageous enough to implement.</p>
<p>I like your plan...it takes guts to refuse to play the game. I'm getting there...because I think the game has become harmful. I wouldn't let my kids play in traffic...
Jones is a visionary from my perspective because she's the first educator I know who has actually stepped forward to acknowledge the responsibility she has in this insanity. EVERY other educator I know blames everyone else but does not examine the role he or she plays in the process. I do not blame her for the baby steps. Jones is in charge of a huge educational institution...I may be a revolutionary at heart, but I know that change in such institutions is incremental...and it's not entirely within her control...she has to tread carefully within a huge bureaucracy. I am a fan because it's progress...and, although it's too late for my boys, my hope is that my adorable (and brilliant:) six-year old nephew will grow up in an educational system that allows him to drink from a water fountain.</p>
<p>I think the basic problem is rather well-highlighted by the 17-page nature of this thread -- it's difficult to make sweeping changes in admissions because everyone has a different idea of what it means to make the process less stressful for kids.</p>
<p>I think MIT is already doing a lot of great things -- they strictly cap the percentage of the class that can be admitted EA, so applying EA doesn't give an admissions boost (the EA admissions rate last year, or maybe the year before, was actually lower than the RD rate). The EA program is non-restrictive and non-binding. Admissions officers are on their blogs and on CC answering questions that applicants have. </p>
<p>Tangentially, I consider my major purpose on CC to be dispelling the myth that you have to have "cured cancer" or something comparable to get into MIT. I know that's not true, both from personal experience and from talking with my friends here -- for all the hand-wringing about academic superstars, they comprise a very small part of the student body as a whole. Most of us are just fun-loving smart kids who like science and engineering. </p>
<p>But what would everybody like to see changed about the admissions process? What can a school like MIT realistically do to make college admissions less stressful? (Other than "stop admitting outstanding candidates," which is what a few people on this board seem to want.)</p>
<p>I do think that if H & I were elite school grads, it would be harder to resist playing that game, though. Money & family circumstances dictated our state school system choice. We did fine. Worked for ivy grads, ivy grads worked for us. Some were highly impressive, others were underwhelming. There's less of a mystique, I think, if from personal experience, you KNOW you can get along just peachy without the elite credentials. Maybe ivy grads who had a few important doors open because of their network are worried that their kids will suffer without those advantages. Hence their anxiety. Non-elite grads have had to open their own doors, and are confident their kids will do the same if no elite school is in the cards.</p>
<p>"I think it is plain common sense to bring sanity to the process. 99% of the world realizes this."</p>
<p>And the other 1% has children happily ensconced at elite colleges and universities. Is that too cynical? Well how 'bout this then ? (And I promise not to bring up ONCE AGAIN that the market for college consultants depends ENTIRELY on admission factors being far too obtuse for ordinary citizens to grasp. Oops, sorry.) </p>
<p>Virtually every applicant to MIT (or Harvard, etc.) is qualified to attend, but there is space for just one in ten. And as Conyat has pointed out, there are probably ten-fold additional HS seniors appropriate for elite schools who do not apply. That means the admissions office can accept just one percent of highly qualified students. That my friends is impossible to do fairly. Are qualified students discouraged from applying? Well duh. And how is the "ten percent of qualifieds" applicant pool whittled down an additional ninety percent? Since virtually all are absolutely outstanding, it's reasonable to assume that the first cut is "anyone with a nit?" Trying to get all the nits out of a teenager's college application is a maddening endeavor for sure, especially when the application is filled with questions that may inadvertenly relegate the applicant to "rejected" status.</p>
<p>MIT's information session approach, in hindsight, was probably an effort to show how it was no place special in fact. This has just occurred to me, 2 years after the fact (and 32 years after I stepped into the infinite corridor as a freshman myself). The information session gave very little insight into what was unique about an MIT education and was instead focused on 'hacks and cool stuff' almost exclusively. At the time, I thought it horrible-- but now the beauty is clear...the wanted to make themselves seem like 'everyone else' so no one would be so broken hearted to not get in!! MIT at it's genius best..((((all this is a slight aside and VERY slightly tongue in cheek))))</p>
<p>What can MIT do? What can any university do? How much does any university influence the behavior of the parents of 6 and 8 year olds in Santa Monica or Plano or Newton or Scarsdale??? Who does???? What makes anyone think that in the long run MIT having 4 versus 10 lines for EC's makes a lick of difference.</p>
<p>David Elkind wrote 'The Hurried Child' what- 25 years ago...who was he talking to and who are the progeny of that generation. Why, they are you and I and our children of course. What did you not hear then that you could or would hear now that would make a difference to you??? Didn't it make any sense when they were 6, and doesn't it make the same sense now? Hurried is not good. Childhood is not a race. It is a process. </p>
<p>Kids do not have to stay up till 2am to do enough to make them Ivy worthy. Our school gets more than very respectable elite college results every year and kids live pretty balanced and interesting lives almost uniformly. They have seated meals with their parents, go out dancing with their friends, and for the most part stay healthy and happy-- even as seniors. The school guidance counselors spend A LOT of time helping parents who only see green start to see other colors, early on in high school. Throughout high school kids are judged by themselves and others based on their contributions in disparate and unique ways- to their teams, their classes, their ensembles, their casts, their communities. Success is defined many, many ways. Life is full, mistakes are made, tragedies happen, people rally around each other-- SAT's and AP's are not the defining attributes of a person......</p>
<p>I am tired of hearing parents blame the system and the colleges and everything and everyone else. We are to blame. We are the cause and we are the solution. All our children are special. Many of our children are very capable. They all need to know that the world is filled with capable and special people and that only 9 or 11 % of those capable and special people who apply to MIT or Harvard every year are going to get in. This is a fact. They are no less capable or special if they do not get in. They are no less likely to have a wonderful, dynamic and fulfilling life. It is not a matter of what they deserve, it is a matter of math.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But what would everybody like to see changed about the admissions process? What can a school like MIT realistically do to make college admissions less stressful? (Other than "stop admitting outstanding candidates," which is what a few people on this board seem to want.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That last comment says it all! </p>
<p>Is "stop admitting outstanding candidates," what people on this board REALLY want.</p>
<p>Sticker: H and I are elite school grads....and I can tell you, it's good for the first job. After that, you've got to prove your stuff anyway. You can get along more than just peachy...I have no anxiety about that...I have anxiety about the process that is chewing up our children and spitting out these stressed out young adults, however.</p>
<p>What would I like to see changed about the admissions process? I think that we have to see evidence that kids are chosen because they are fun-loving smart math/sci kids. In my era (dark ages), it was the well-rounded kids who got in. How great that we could try all sorts of different things while we were young! Now, you have to be an "expert" in one area. That means starting when one is five and NOT trying all those other things...debate, art, soccer, etc. Now regular kids won't get any playing time on a soccer field if they are in sixth grade and have never tried soccer before! I would like to see admissions swing back towards the kids who TRY things. We are entering an era of innovation...these kids better be up for change and trying new things! I would like to see admissions deemphasize the SATs, which has become a zillion dollar industry...not the aptitude test it was meant to be. SAT tutors in our area charge $200 per hour which is more than some doctors. If kids do not score over 2100 because they were busy helping at a senior center instead of memorizing their vocab...OK!!! We need people who are going to completely change how we care for our older population because we're all living longer! I would like to see GPA analyzed more carefully...instead of having to graduate in the top 5%, I would like admissions to acknowledge those who may have gotten a lower grade because they tried something new...or something difficult. Let a "B" in a rigorous math class BE as good as an "A" in a less rigorous math class. Reward a kid for taking on challenge and difficulty and staying the course. I would like to see colleges ask students to take FEWER useless AP courses (they do not substitute for college courses and are really just silly). Maybe, we should just do away with them altogether in favor of much richer courses. I would admit the hard-working, smart kids who brim with excitement about life, learning and the endless possibilities ahead of them, not tired, stressed-out veterans of a ridiculous process. I would not admit the game players who did everything by the book...I can't tell you how many friends I have whose kids lied about starting their own businesses because that was what the colleges wanted to see. Finish that off.
That means the message must also be handed down to the high schools: STOP SENDING US YOUR BURNED OUT STUDENTS. Test less, teach more. Give homework that is carefully thought through...not just the next 200 pages in the text. Have teachers coordinate with each other, so students will not be so heavily burdened. When the school tells kids to get sleep, they must also enable kids to get sleep. I think if the admissions process changes, there will be a trickle down effect that will help all students down the line...even to the little first graders featured in Newsweek (for God's sake).</p>
<p>Anitaw, you get my vote as CC parent of the month.</p>
<p>From my neck of the woods.... there's actually a lot an individual parent can do to stop the craziness (or at least not make your kid crazy.)</p>
<p>Go feed the ducks on the weekend w/your 6 year old instead of playing on a traveling soccer team. Take your kid to the library after school instead of karate or ballet. Build a sandbox in the yard and put sand in it. Tell them that's their summer enrichment program. Get them a shovel and some tomato plants and explain that instead of gymnastics they're going to learn to weed and plant. When a kid complains s/he's bored, shrug your shoulders and hand him/her a cookbook and a dozen eggs, a canister of flour and point them towards the kitchen.</p>
<p>There are many things you can do in your own household to raise kids who are skilled (nobody wins an Olympics for being able to bake bread but it's a life skill; ditto for fixing a vacuum cleaner) and interested in many things and capable and self-confident. There's no line on the college app for these things, and you don't need a 3 page annotated resume w/cover letter, but by the end, you've probably raised a good kid-- and if he/she ends up at an elite school then great-- take the money you've saved on ski lessons and therapy for your kid and take a vacation to Europe.</p>
<p>Your child does not have to do SAT tutoring in lieu of volunteer work.
Your child does not have to do IB diploma....
Your child can get the B+ in the higher math class.
Your child does not have to be an expert, only to pursue interests to the point that they learn something about who they are and can write and talk about it.
Your child can stay home and play pool or even (gasp) and hour or two of Halo if they want.</p>
<p>You are the parent of your child. It is within your sphere of influence to permit and encourage these things. You have to be honest about what you are afraid of if you do. But, if you are okay with having a child go to Kenyon rather than Harvard....you can do it, really you can.</p>
<p>I can't speak for others on this thread, but in answer to your question, no I don't want to see the elites stop accepting outstanding students. In fact, I'm not even averse to elites admitting the requisite number of athletes, actors and musicians necessary to make the campus a vibrant community. I don't even object to accepting a few developmental prospects because financial strength is also important IMHO.</p>
<p>What I would like is for each and every applicant to get a fair hearing at city hall. That's a hard thing to do, for reasons enunciated in my previous post. But I do think MIT and other elites can (and should) do a better job of clarifying the process so that every outstanding individual has an equal shot at admission.</p>
<p>Anitaw, you make an excellent argument for just not playing the game. I agree. Perhaps one can change the system one child at a time...however, I am in favor of a systemic change that will help all of our nation's children, not just mine.</p>
<p>NewHope...the process can't be very well clarified because it's not a science...it's quite subjective. That will mean deserving candidates don't get in. It's not as if MIT can say, "we will admit you if you have the following qualifications: x,y and z." I do believe every outstanding individual does have an equal shot at admission...and is carefully considered. That doesn't mean he or she will get in.</p>
<p>"Go feed the ducks on the weekend w/your 6 year old instead of playing on a traveling soccer team."</p>
<p>In the area where I live, there aren't too many 6 year old on traveling--or select--soccer teams. And, for what is it worth, when it comes to wasted time, effort, and money, this activity pales when compared to the MANY activities that are mandatory in our high schools. Ask what players on traveling teams think of the requirements to play varsity sports ...! A young person can do ALL the things you advocate and play a heathful actvity such as soccer without much of a problem. The issues start much later than at 6 years old ... mostly at the time that middle school becomes a mere preparation for a high school that has become a nightmare of conflicting activities. Better sign up for the right classes to ensure a spot at the State Science Fair and better pick the right classes for those necessary AP classes in 9th grade! </p>
<p>Parents do indeed have choices, but thinking that BWRK and Lake Wobegonites will ever roam the earth again is wishful thinking, at least without CLEAR changes in ADMISSION practices. Why? Do you know many parents who will be the first to drop the activities that "seem" to work? Please tell that to the families who still raise Stepford children with calendars filled to the brim with Suzuki classes, preparation for the illusory research gigs, and other solitary pursuits that have been invented for the sole purpose of padding a resume.</p>
<p>Newhope, my comment, "Is "stop admitting outstanding candidates," what people on this board REALLY want." was merely an expression of absolute puzzlement at the conclusion reached by someone who seemingly wants to offer a voice of authority on the subject.</p>
<p>What can a college realistically do? A lot more than erasing a few lines, that is for sure.</p>
<p>"I would like to see colleges ask students to take FEWER useless AP courses (they do not substitute for college courses and are really just silly). Maybe, we should just do away with them altogether in favor of much richer courses."</p>
<p>symphonymom, I must conclude you have little experience with large, "diverse" public high schools, where any core class other than AP is so rinky-dink that smart kids lose all interest in school. My kids are pretty laid back, we are very active but ditched organized athletics long ago, do private music lessons just for fun, eat dinner together--always--take bike rides to nowhere on weekends..you get the idea. We are not high stress, but nonetheless 12th grade son was already a US National AP scholar by 11th grade, and those classes, that you think are silly, were considered by him to be fairly good. Most of us don't have the luxury of comparing the AP curriculum against great independent schools and their well-educated teachers. We have to compare it against dumbed-down, do whatever you want curriculum taught by grads of open-enrollment schools of ed situated in the middle of nowhere. Keep that idea about doing away with AP courses under wraps until the general level of public school coursework has improved about a thousand times over. (BTW I agree that AP in general do not substitute for college courses, but as I've said before on this thread, that is not the reason the smart kids I know take the courses.)</p>
<p>When my children were 4 and 6 I put them in tennis classes in a suburb of Dallas renown for the 'redshirting' of boys so they would be bigger and better football players. The older one wasn't keen, the younger was a natural (as he was at virtually every sport or other endeavor he tried thereafter). The coach, after 2 months, told me he couldn't teach the 4 year old anymore and I would have to take the child (who still liked afternoon naps) to another part of the suburbs to see a different coach.</p>
<p>I had signed the boys up because there was no one in the neighborhood to play with(they were all doing junior wrestling and geography competitions) and 4 afternoons/week of playmobil/legos/treeclimbing/jelloanimals etc seemed plenty of down time to me. When I decided to not take the 4 year old to the elite tennis clinic my neighbor told me in all seriousness- "But now he will never make varsity."</p>
<p>Xiggi, it starts much,much earlier than you think(after all, this was 1991). It is insidious. Parents feel they are being graded from the moment they decide on a name. </p>
<p>My kids, BWRKS both, did very fine thank you very much on the backs of resumes that were honest and interesting, transcripts that were not perfect, and presumably wonderful recommendations from teachers who enjoyed their spontaneity, humor, empathy, love of learning, playfulness etc.. My husband and I, both grads of very elites, wouldn't have had it any other way. </p>
<p>Why do you think that parents are not capable of doing what is right for their children? We are slaves to no one and nothing unless we choose to be!!</p>
<p>Midmo...under wraps it will stay...you are totally one-hundred percent correct about the need to raise the general level of public school coursework a thousand times over before we do away with anything..we need more money...and higher salaries for teachers. Until we have something better, we can't take the only available option away from our kids.</p>