<p>They actually have something based on the SAT and a higher threshold than National Merit - the Presidential Scholars, though I don’t think there are any scholarships associated with it. I wonder why they don’t seem to get as much press even though it seems as though the process is very similar.</p>
1 Like
<p>Bay:</p>
<p>Please do not personalize this issue. Thank you.</p>
<p>I didn’t intend to, its just that when you suggested that those 1.485 million who did not achieve NMF status would have been WoWing or “haunting malls” if they hadn’t been taking the PSAT, I felt a compulsion to come to their defense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is what you wrote and what I responded to. If you don’t agree with my response and feel that I was attacking those who did not make NMF–which I DID NOT-- you can defend those who do not achieve NMF status without bringing other posters’ kids into it. Further, I do not see the big deal about 4-5 or even 10 hours of life being “wasted.” If the students who did not prep got some practice for the SAT, that’s not 4-5 hours wasted. If some think that the big deal is to receive NMF status as opposed to practicing for the SAT and take it again, that’s their business. And if they still don’t, well, life is like that.</p>
<p>But since your brought up my kids, I could not care less for them to be recognized (and this is a very very old story, anyway). I’m not even sure if my S mentioned his NMF status on his resume. But he attended a public school with SAT scores lower than the national average. It would be nice for the students to see that academic achievement is prized by the school almost as much as athletic achievement. It does not have to be recognizing individuals but just publishing the number of NM Commended, SFs, and Finalists. I’m not talking about the local newspaper but the school’s own newsletter. One would be hard put to find the information. And it is a pretty typical situation.</p>
<p>Hey, everyone</p>
<p>Coming in quite late to this thread, but another wonderful CC member pointed this thread out to me as I am at senior at UHS and know Jon Reider decently well ;)</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t think it’s that big of a deal - it reflects the culture of our school very well in general. We don’t give out any awards at all. Academic, athletic, etc., mostly because it’s such a competitive school. As someone else said, there were 34 semi-finalists and 13 commended. My grade has about 100 students. So yeah, that’s about half the class, and over a quarter of the class are finalists. </p>
<p>UHS is very big on minimizing competition. For example, when early acceptances came out, we were asked not to post anything on Facebook, we’re not supposed to wear college sweatshirts to school, etc.
Extreme? Perhaps some of it. But I can say from firsthand experience that it would feel extremely, extremely odd to announce something like NMF at my school, where there is already so much academic pressure and achievement in terms of getting into top colleges, etc.</p>
1 Like
<p>I did the PSAT in 11th grade and do feel it was “wasted life” I’ll never get back. I was commended and got nothing more than my name in the school paper and embarassment from it.</p>
<p>I didn’t even take the SAT, so the PSAT was really worthless for me…as it is for 95% of kids who take it</p>
<p>marite,
I don’t object to your disagreement with me about whether or not the 4 - 10 hours was wasted. It was the assumption that the non-NMFs (which I know includes the kids of at least a couple of posters on this thread - but not yours) would have been WoWing or “haunting malls” if they weren’t spending that 5 - 10 hours on the PSAT that struck me as a bit insulting.</p>
<p>But if that is what your (NMF) kids did when they weren’t taking the PSAT, then I would conclude that it wasn’t intended as an insult. That is why I asked if your kids WoWed and “haunted malls” when they weren’t taking standardized tests.</p>
<p>My son is spending many hours applying for, and going on interview weekends to, various competitive scholarships that he likely won’t win, or perhaps won’t use (school specific to a safety). Is that wasting time? What is the big deal about taking a few hours to take a test that can potentially get you some money? 2K may not be a lot of money in college terms but I won’t turn it down. </p>
<p>And yes, my son probably would have spent those few hours playing video games instead. He didn’t study for the PSAT and only made commended, but did study for the SAT and made Presidential Scholar Candidate (no, he won’t take time from his video games to do the application as its highly unlikely he will win). Mostly though because we live in one of those sparsely populated states where you can get NMSF if you break 200 ;)</p>
<p>Bay, so was the post I quoted sarcastic? I did not take it as such. You did not come across as defending kids who did not achieve high on the PSAT; instead, your post seemed to suggest quite the contrary, and that if they did not do well, it was wasted time. Never mind that the PSAT’s essential purpose is to prepare students for the SAT. </p>
<p>I think a LOT of school is wasted time, which is why my S raced through the curriculum and graduated early. The time not spent doing mindless make-work was far more significant than 4-5 hours taking a test.</p>
<p>Rocket6Louise: If you were not interested in the SAT and your only reason to take the PSAT was to get NM recognition and perhaps some merit money, even so, it was not time wasted. Not every person who enters a competition wins anything. That does not have to mean that it was useless to enter that competition, whether it’s the Olympics or the NM competition. It would have been time wasted if you truly had no chance. It’s like applying to colleges: if you don’t apply you’re sure not to get in. But if you do apply, you still may not get in.</p>
<p>I agree with Bay about the SAT machine, but also agree with marite that the PSAT exists to prepare its participants for its big brother, as well as to assess one’s own applied skill level (to a narrow degree), and to provide a range of national standards for that self-assessment. [My aside is that this will be true until the happy day that the SAT may be exorcised from the student body politic.]</p>
<p>I disagree strongly as an educator who has studied tests for years (and compared student outcomes later, relative to standardized testing), that it’s either only necessary to read voraciously to do well on it, or that performance on it is a measure of previous effort put into academics. </p>
<p>Not even close. Like the SAT, it measures primarily how well one takes tests, and that in turn is a function of many, many variables – some inborn, some learned. Because one does well on a standardized test does not necessarily mean he or she was prepped/coached, or is rich, however. My older D was an NMF; she was hardly monied. But boy can the girl take tests. She’s the kind of person who can be taught (or can read) one fact, one time, and remember it forever. She also has an amazingly centered, calm personality which is a huge asset in test-taking. I think the word is unruffled. She has a laser concentration, an ability to excise all surrounding distractions, and remain in that inward discipline for a prolonged period of time. She exhibited this as an infant. I don’t think that she should be “rewarded” for what amounts to luck.</p>
<p>She happened also to, yes, read voraciously, but so did her younger sister, who bombed the PSAT and bombs all standardized tests, because of her LD. Had D#2 in fact not had such a fine pre-college education on financial aid, I can promise you she would not have done even as well as she did on the SAT to receive the college admissions offers she did.</p>
<p>Without coaching, quality of education is one of the variables. I am well acquainted with SFUHS. SFUHS, and the previous schools attended by most of those students prepare students supremely for the PSAT and the SAT. At our local suburban publics around here (by contrast), the education is mediocre. Not everyone even takes the PSAT when it’s offered. And when any of those students scores a combined 1500 on the SAT, there’s oohing and ahhing as if that’s a significant score. There’s even more oohing and ahhing if they reach 1800. Only the kids from the expensive privates do significantly better than that, without coaching, (or without much of it), on the SAT.</p>
<p>I’m not “proud” of my older D that she was NMF. I’m damn proud, however, of the consistent level of excellence she put into her pre-college and college education (you know, actual coursework), and equally proud of the similar effort put in by her sibling, against much greater odds/handicaps. It’s in the daily work where the rubber meets the road, and it’s for that, i.m.o., that students should receive public recognition. Call me someone with an old-fashioned work ethic.</p>
<p>I’m truly happy for students who earn merit money via test scores (in part or in whole), and do not begrudge them that. I’m just very clear on what that does and does not represent. </p>
<p>SFUHS, btw, is a major Ivy feeder. The quality of its curriculum and product is instantly recognized by the Elites. The school is located in a wealthy, wealthy section of town, attended by children whose parents have equally fine educations. (In other words, the privileged.)</p>
<p>epiphany, Very well said.</p>
<p>Although I will admit to being proud of my kid for being a NMF. Well, I guess not of that exactly, but, ironically, there are precious few public recognitions of kids who do well academically in public schools and I’ll take it where it comes. At least that’s been my expeirence and our high school is far better than most. Yes, a lot of it is luck and inborn but there is the choice he’s made, over and over again, to be curious, to explore and push himself to learn for learnings sake. </p>
<p>I’m not articulating this well. Maybe I’m just a proud mom looking for an excuse to share that pride. But I want to make clear that I celebrate the accomplishments of all the kids in my life as well, what ever they are. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is far more merit money tied to being a NMF than a NMSF.</p>
<p>I’m not a big fan of standardized tests in the first place. But I fail to see what is so outrageous about students being recognized for a high score. </p>
<p>In my opinion, I am also seeing some sour grapes here. I tell my friends to have their kids take it sophomore year and see what happens. If they are reasonably close to the cut off score, buy a study book and then call it a day. It’s not that expensive and it does not take that long considering what can come from it.</p>
<p>For example, at Northeastern, there is a competitive NMF scholarship for upto full tuition. That would be $140,000 over four years. There are also colleges with automatic rewards for NMF’s, from a tuition discount of a few thousands upto full ride (tuition, room & board) plus stipends for things like computers and study abroad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My brother was a NMSF after failing to pass both Algebra 1 and 9th grade English. Furthermore, I got 1 wrong on the math in 9th grade, so you’re basically looking at a middle school level (maybe marginally higher) math test. The score you get on it has very little to do with how well you’ve done or how far you’ve gone in school.</p>
<p>I know that a lot of people on here think academic accomplishments deserve more recognition, but celebrating National Merit Qualifiers is a bit like announcing who scored the highest on the SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If she turns those traits into being a cool and competent surgeon, she will get a lot of rewards too.</p>
<p>All our rewards come from some kind of luck, where you were born, genetics, little random factors here and there.</p>
<p>I will refrain from commenting on the content of the message but will say (though its in some respects irrelevant!) that Jon Reider is an extremely nice guy.</p>
<p>He got his bachelor and doctoral degrees from Stanford and worked there for many years as senior associate director of admissions.</p>
<p>The beauty of our educational system is that there is variety - both in higher education and k-12. If Jon’s philosophy and/or a particular school’s philosophy doesn’t jive with your or your family’s priorities, don’t send your child there! </p>
<p>Have a good day everyone. If you’re like me, you’ll be trudging through some fresh snow all day.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Considering how much of that variety is dictated by income, I don’t know how beautiful I think the current system is. </p>
<p>I think perhaps what got to me about this article is that it sounds like he is being dismissive of something that can be a point of pride to a whole lot of schools in this country. It just rubs me the wrong way that someone who runs a school like that, and who has the education he does, would claim to be standing up for lower income families. Although I understand where he is coming from and I’m not disputing the data.</p>
<p>If a Title I district wants to celebrate this, then what is the harm?</p>
<p>Good luck in the snow!</p>
<p>californiadancer: Thanks for the insight into UHS. That explains the principal’s attitude BUT he should not extrapolate from his HS to the rest of the world, which is, I assure you, very different!</p>
<p>Our very good suburban HS produced 25 NMFs this year (our of a class of 425 or so) and we are proud of them. There are other high schools in the area that only have 1 to 5 every year, and they are equally proud of these kids. </p>
<p>The difference in the 2 schools may be genetic–children of largely white collar workers who have received their parents’ “smart” genes? But whatever you have received, it counts for nothing if you don’t work at school. </p>
<p>So kudos to BOTH of ephiphany’s daughters. :)</p>
<p>And there is a thread with stories about NMSF’s who did not advance due to getting a couple of C’s in some subject or other. The thought is that the requirements have gotten more stringent (growing population, same number of finalists?) because anecdotally, years ago those C’s were not a barrier.</p>
<p>Full disclosure: All 4 of my kids made NMF based on this “one-time” test. The first 3 were all able to go to colleges we could not have afforded without the scholarship money. #4 hasn’t decided yet. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it would be noteworthy, and deserving of recognition, even if the PSAT only measured these attributes:</p>
<ul>
<li> Excellent memory</li>
<li> Laser concentration</li>
<li> Ability to maintain inward discipline over a prolonged period</li>
</ul>
<p>However, it is unlikely that a student could achieve NMF status unless these attributes were combined with an ample amount of academic effort and intellectual curiosity. So I think our educational community SHOULD recognize and encourage these students for their excellence, however unfair some people may believe this is.</p>
<p>I have a very different take than most here, it seems. I like Californiadancer’s school practice. No individual award recognition period. I have followed the philosophy of minimizing awards and recognition with my daughters since they were small and am very happy with how it’s gone. I simply ignored the invitation to attend the awards assemblies where each was recognized as one of two commended students in their grades. They were fine with it because they know I’ve always downplayed awards and outside attention. I want them to be internally motivated, feeling satisfaction for their own accomplishments independent of the approval of others. Public praise and attention can boost external motivation but that is not the solid long-lasting kind that leads to continual effort. External motivation, in fact, is quite fragile and can lead to feelings of insecurity, as one is always trying to live up to their own past glory. We all know kids who were the center of attention in their small schools who had a hard time adjusting to the lack positive feedback when they were in a bigger sea. This goes for athletes, musicians, scholars, etc. It’s fine to recognize school athletic and academic teams or the drama club and orchestra, but to single out kids for being better at something than others does not inspire the right kind of drive in either the prized or the prizeless. There is a continuum between external and internal motivation, and we all have a combination of both, but those who tend toward the internally motivated end will be less competitive-minded, more resilient and more steady in their success.</p>
<p>^^Good philosophy, if your daughters are truly “okay” with it and won’t look back someday wishing you had been there for them. You know them better than anyone else.</p>
<p>For some kids, praise makes the difference in how they feel about themselves. If they don’t need it, fine. But for those that do, it can be hurtful for an already fragile ego.</p>
<p>I think NMF is a big deal. The psat measures reading comprehension, mastery of the English language and mathematical reasoning. It also measures poise under pressure. Sure, lots of kids are “bad standardized test takers” but there is value in being able to keep your cool in a stessful situation and do well. Not saying it’s the only thing that matters in life, but it is valuable.</p>
<p>I think percentage of NMSFs in a school is the best indicator of how competitive the school is. Colleges must certainly take this into account when trying to parse the meaning of 4.0+ gpa and high ranking. It is simply not going to mean that much if the student attends a school with few if any NMSFs.</p>
<p>And the whole notion of NMSF being strictly correlated to high income is becoming really, really tired. High income is correlated with high intelligence, work ethic. Duh.</p>