<p>Also, a lot of people are naturally competitive and happily thrive in a competitive environment.</p>
<p>Of course I get that Pizza Girl. Some kids are motivated by outside sources. Some kids are motivated by themselves. But I see a huge difference in wanting to learn as much as possible, as compared to feeling great stress to excel in school relative to your peers. I knew people in my school who always strived and worried about being the best. One girl I knew went to Princeton from my HS class. She was pretty much disliked in High School given her personality, but she did eventually blossom and is now a very nice and sweet lady. Another kid similar to the princeton attendee ended up putting a bullet in his head a few years after college, I assume because he could not handle the stresses he placed on himself.</p>
<p>The problem with these boards from the pro-elite crowd is the attitude that for children to be considered successes in life, they need to be at the perceived top of the hierarchy. Woe to them if they do not go to the very top schools and thus have to be around the vapid, the intellectually lazy, the down right stupid. There are people here who likely believe if they donât get in to the very best schools, that they are failures, their lives are ruined because they will be relegated going to school with all of the other failures. I feel bad for these people, and I would guess that these people are to some degree well represented in the Ivy League. These are people, in my estimation, who will never be happy, because they will never perceive themselves to be what they believe they have to be . . the best of the best. Internal or external motivation is really irrelevant. It is the effect to the Psyche that is the issue.</p>
<p>Bay, those are inflation adjusted numbers.</p>
<p>Kids are psychologically damaged by lots of experiences in life, and parents can do a lot worse than push their children academically. Besides, not pushing academically doesnât necessarily act as the neutral choice, since some parents donât emphasize schoolwork because they want to push other things instead. We all know the parents who de-emphasize schoolwork so their kids can dedicate more time to becoming sports stars. I definitely know a few moms who push their daughters to be beautiful, thin and popular (esp. with boys), which involves time spent shopping, at parties, and in the nail salon and tanning booth. There are also families around here who really stress music and whose kids practice piano or violin hours a day and for whom winning music competitions even trumps studying. Also, not pushing academics with your kids can effectively work out to be the same as pushing them into YOUR generationâs ideal of that fun and ânormalâ childhood, whether thatâs their ideal or not and whether that suits the times or not.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow. Is it really that hard to believe that there are students out there who love to challenge themselves. My colleagues who attend elite schools in the US (and theyâre probably better than the average US attendee, given that theyâre internationals) are extremely driven, interesting, creative, insightful, kind and generally great people. </p>
<p>For some people, itâs fun to try to do new things, whether itâs organizing an event or studying a new topic. Itâs fun to try for competitions that are bigger and fancier and more exciting. Of course it hurts when you donât win, because it really, really does. But if you care about the subject matter and enjoyed the experience, you forget it and move on.</p>
<p>Let me give you an example. Among my friend circle (thereâs no pressure to attend certain universities over others here), kids have:</p>
<ul>
<li>Discovered a novel test for detecting certain diseases (will not specify for identity reasons)</li>
<li>Contributed to theories for fundamental physics</li>
<li>Published papers in legitimate scientific journals with high impact factors </li>
<li>Obtained patents for their independent work done for science fair</li>
<li>Founded a national literacy agency</li>
<li>Started youth science organizations that are internationally recognized </li>
<li>Corresponded and worked with youth engagement organizations to develop student voice movements</li>
<li>Contributed to education reform movements</li>
<li>Helped PLAN a local political campaign</li>
<li>Hosted TEDx events</li>
<li>Run multiple small computer businesses</li>
</ul>
<p>And this is just a few things done in high school off the top of my head. I think for some people, itâs very hard to grasp the idea that itâs FUN testing and building and being responsible and affecting people in a positive way. It feels great to know that you matter and are making a difference. </p>
<p>And yeah, these kids typically continue their work in university, which is why colleges will, and should, seek them out. </p>
<p>What a disgusting attitude. Itâs this sense of anti-intellectualism and xenophobia that is bringing this country down. That everyone who worked hard was pushed by a domineering tiger mum and missed out on their childhoods. As a former teenager, I feel that teenage students get far less credit than they deserve.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is there anyone posting on this particular topic / forum on CC who believes that? Itâs possible to highly value an elite school opportunity and think itâs worth striving for, but also believe that the most important thing is your childrenâs happiness and health and not what it says on their diploma. I am easily able to be proud of my own kids who are at fancy schools, supportive of my friends who are looking to send their kids to similar caliber schools, AND supportive of my friends who are sending their children to âaverageâ schools. (My best friend - a Northwestern grad herself - is sending her daughter to the University of Kansas. I donât need to âlook downâ on her kid for that because my kids go to âbetterâ schools. Her kidâs happy, Iâm happy. Itâs all good. There are a lot of different paths in life.)
Itâs just not all that difficult to simultaneously value elite educations AND believe that thereâs more to that in life.</p>
<p>skiblack,
Iâve lost track of the gist of your argument. Obtaining admission to an elite college wonât necessarily result from all the âpushingâ or being competitive. Most of these competitive kids wonât get into the elites, and will end up all over the place, not just HYPS et al. The psychologically damaged will be found at state colleges, too. Are you advocating for some kind of standard parenting model or something, that ensures no kids are psychologically damaged?</p>
<p>For some students, the âYou can go to for grad schoolâ can be a powerful motivator. Especially if theyâre going into occupations for which graduate education is mandatory and/or highly desirable.</p>
<p>It certainly was for many HS classmates who turned down admission to NYU-Stern for CUNY-Baruch for undergrad as they all ended up going to Wharton, Harvard, Columbia, NYU-Stern and other topflight b-schools for their MBAs. </p>
<p>Same with friends/colleagues who went to lower-tiered collegesâŠwhether public or private with scholarship/FA for undergrad and later went to elite grad programs in their respective fields. </p>
<p>However, this has to be balanced out with the educational/career aspirations of the individual student as some may not have the sustained interest and/or the aptitude for further education in grad school. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And there are probably just as many psychologically damaged kids or those with various issues going to non-elite collegesâŠincluding directional publics.</p>
<p>While there may be some different reasons, the main denominator is the individual studentâŠnot which college he/she attends. </p>
<p>By the same token, some studentsâŠespecially those who thrive in an academically competitive environment full of high academic achiever/Gifted genius kids NEED the environment an an academically competitive elite colleges provides. </p>
<p>Others may crumble under the pressure and the intimidation factor at the same types of elite colleges while still more others are flexible enough to be happy whereever theyâre planted. </p>
<p>Parents and the students themselves may want to examine where the student concerned fits and act/plan accordingly. </p>
<p>Failure to do so if the kids are not flexible in either end of the spectrum may result either in a student frustrated at being at a college where most/critical mass of classmatesâ academic levels are far too low for them or converselyâŠa student who finds him/herself overwhelmed and heavily intimidated by classmates whose academic/intellectual levels are well above his/her own.</p>
<p>And I simply fail to comprehend why there has to be a half assed dichotomy between being ânormalâ and being bright. We have tons of fun.</p>
<p>I know a girl who has multiple patents in a very important industry, along with innovation awards and other prizes and she can drink more than anyone I know. </p>
<p>And some people arenât into that scene, but they still have fun in their own ways. Itâs so rage inducing, for some jerk on the internet to say youâve only done all that youâve done because your parents made you. Or that you have psychological issues or other problems. </p>
<p>Iâm sure thereâs a MINOR contingent of individuals that have been pushed by their parents, and their parents alone. However, you can only go SO far when youâre being pushed. Either you get into it and start to run, or you flounder. I know a guy who has played at Carnegie and many other prestigious places and now attends Pton. Maybe his parents, maybe our parents continually said âeducation is important. You need to work hard and take everything you do seriously.â Thatâs one thing. But itâs a whole other ball game to insinuate that high achievers are pushed by adults all the time. </p>
<p>You, and people like you, ought to be ashamed of devaluing the real and significant accomplishments of students because of your own deep seated insecurities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did you create a brand new ID to attack other posters? Truth is, I donât consider it a âreal and significant accomplishmentâ to get into an elite school or any school for that matter. To me, accomplishment comes from what you do in your career or job or life. Many Tom, Dick and Harryâs attend elite schools and end up accomplishing nothing. Get out of school and show you are competent on the job, that you are a man of your word, that you have integrity, that you can get your job done. That you are a good spouse or father or mother to your children, that you are a decent human being. That is accomplishment. The School you attend? That hopefully gives you a push in the right direction but is hardly a seal of approval or a guarantee a person will amount to a hill of beans.</p>
<p>You must have skimmed over his specific examples of the accomplishments of his friends who attend elite schools, like making medical discoveries, running businesses, founding organizations, and performing in Carnegie Hall. Please review his post #225. He was not saying that their primary accomplishment was getting in the school, though I disagree that thatâs not a significant accomplishment given the standards.</p>
<p>IMNSHO, there is no point in continuing to debate a person who will say this stuff.</p>
<p>Agreed. The last few pages provide proof of how nasty the bashing can be, for those posters who claim theyâve never experienced it.</p>
<p>1971: $13,150</p>
<p>1981: $16,300</p>
<p>1991: $28,750</p>
<p>2001: $37,000 </p>
<p>So? in 1971 a loaf of bread cost 16 cents and gasoline was 36 cents. Average house cost $28,000. A first class stamp cost 6 cents.</p>
<p>I skipped over it because it is irrelevant to this thread. There are people of great accomplishments who never attended school, but that is not what this thread is about. It is the very rare âeliteâ student out there discovering new laws of physics, making medical discoveries, etc. And those that are can generally be distinguished from their elite peers as being far ahead of them in the IQ and Creativity deparments. These are people who would be successful no matter where they went to school. </p>
<p>Mathmom . . . the post on Harvard is in INFLATION ADJUSTED DOLLARS. This shows that in forty years, Harvard tuition for law school has increased by about 300 percent (again in inflation adjusted dollars). What is the reason for such a huge increase? Is the learning any better? No, the schools are simply pigs. Thatâs all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Woe to those who go to the very top schools and, rather than be internally motivated, count their success in how well they rank among their classmates. Itâs a lot easier to be near the top of each class if your classmates also consist of âthe intellectually lazy, the down right stupid.â</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Funny, you seem awfully threatened by it. </p>
<p>My reaction to Bay / Consolation / Hunt / TheGFG / anyone else whose kids attend or attended Ivy League schools is â great, Iâm truly delighted for your kids, I wish them well in their future endeavors. I have no a priorireason to assume any of those kids were âpushedâ by overzealous parents or that any of these kids are snobby, nerdy or any other negative stereotype. My kids donât attend those schools â they werenât interested in that set of schools â they attend other schools that offer different, but also great opportunities and itâs all good. Their cousin, my nephew, is at Princeton. He worked hard to get there and Iâm happy for him. Itâs not a competition. </p>
<p>You know, for all your prattling about the meaning of life, the ability to be sincerely happy for other peopleâs successes without feeling jealous or threatened is, IMO, a pretty darn important component of a âsuccessfulâ people. itâs a quality I have worked hard to cultivate in myself.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is just another subtle attack on the opinions of people you donât like and assumes facts that could not be further from the truth. I am jealous of no-one and, not that it matters in the least, but am far more successful than I could have ever hoped to have been . . including compared to my ivy league educated buddies. But of course you have to assume that when others donât agree with you, it has to be because they have sour grapes, or are jealous or whatever. Not that there could be actual, legitimate reasons for their opinions. So typical of so many on a cite like this.</p>
<p>And further, you all are putting words in my mouth. I donât begrudge anybody their elite educations. I simply donât think that they are all that big of a deal and in many cases are probably counter productive. But I really donât care who is educated where, that to me is meaningless drivel. Again, in the end, its what a person does with his life that is important, not where he went to school. </p>
<p>My whole point since I have joined this site is to knock the educational institutions for being greedy pigs, not to knock the ivy league. But some of you make it so easy to do so.</p>
<p>You know, skiblack, Iâm the daughter of someone who dropped out of high school, got a GED while serving in the Army in Vietnam as a grunt, came back and went to an âaverageâ college on the GI Bill but never finished, but had a lot of people-sense and skills, worked very hard and became president of a brand-name company, very successful in his field, and able to give his daughters opportunities and experiences he never would have dreamed of. So, you donât need to convince me that an elite education isnât necessary for life success. I know that. We all know that. Youâre not telling anyone anything new. </p>
<p>Itâs fine with me that you donât think itâs all that big of a deal and that itâs not worth the money. I disagree that these educations are âcounterproductive,â though. Thatâs where it all turns weird.</p>
<p>skiblack,</p>
<p>I could have sent my Ds to Cal instead of H&Y, and saved us about $80K on each (assuming they could graduate in 4 years). I could have also sent my Ds to a CSU or community college nearby, had them live at home and saved us closer to $180K on each. The commuting to CSU/cc were not options we considered, because they were not the college experience we wanted for our Ds, and neither did they.</p>
<p>They considered Cal very seriously, but in the end they liked H&Y better, mainly due to their size, living situations, and experience on the other coast. We felt we could afford the extra $80K, and they were going to get the reputedly top education we could possibly give them, so they went there instead, and everyone was happy.</p>
<p>You are new to this site, but there have been countless threads about how outrageously expensive a 4-year away college costs nowadays, and whether it is worth it. I am one who is in agreement that it is too expensive and there is no rational reason why it should cost $55K per year to teach, feed and house my 100 lb. daughter for 8 months. The bottom line is that they had earned the opportunity to choose from among the top colleges in the world, and we had the means to pay, and as PG points out, there was nothing more important weâd rather spend our money on. Iâd have preferred that H&Y cost less, but they didnât. Thatâs it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I still donât see how they are greedy pigs. Do you think Mercedes is a greedy pig when it brings out a new car priced at whatever-it-costs? Rolex for selling a watch that costs $yy? The Four Seasons for selling a hotel room that costs $zz a night? </p>
<p>Youâd actually have more of a case if you were talking about public universities, which are using our taxpayer dollars. But private universities â Harvard can price itself at $1,000,000 a year for all I care. I donât HAVE to send my kid there.</p>