yes - ucbalmunus is saying what I meant. we have 4 years overlap between a total of 12 years of college for the 4 kiddos.
If a kid were to get into a full meet needs school, that doesn’t mean much for the other kids who aren’t in that school when there’s overlap. We still have to pay their EFC and more at non full-meet needs schools. Thankfully we live in the midwest, where there’s not much pressure about about top ranked schools.
just wanted to give another perspective to MichaelCShort about the $33K etc at Stanford and how its comparable for a UC school. . . . but if you have 4 kids and income <185K and live in an area where there’s no housing equity growth . . . its rough to save and come up with that much for so many years straight. Kudos to those who do!
@MichaelCShort I just wanted to say don’t be frustrated with this group. Some of us are opinionated and have a different frame of reference on all things college. Bear with them (us) and I think you will gain some knowledge as well as us learning a lot from you and your experiences as an adcom and college counselor. I’ve grown some thick skin here at CC lol…
“Top schools actively look to find students who could attend, but can’t afford it. That is their ideal applicant.”
Maybe Stanford, but I’ve been around Stanford, living a few minutes away, that campus along with places like Harvard ooze wealth. They would not be comfortable a class where everybody got FA. Even they have budgets, if this was their ideal applicant, they’d spend a lot less time recruiting at wealthy places, including internationally.
Here is the worst advice I’ve ever heard. I was at the Rubik’s Cube world championships in Australia with my son who was a 7th grader. There was a kid in a long line for merch behind me and we started talking. He was a Sophomore or Junior and had a world record in one of the cubes (gotta keep him anonymous in case other speed cubers are on here!) Anyway, his mom and sisters were there with him but super bored and back in the hotel. She was insisting that after World’s he give up his cubing dedication and start doing better things to get him into college like sports and being “More well rounded.”
I told him to send her my way and I would have a big talk with her; this kid was great.
Why would anyone think that being “well rounded” or being a probably ordinary level high school player in some sport would be better for college admission than being a world champion in something that most people would be impressed by?
“Well rounded” mostly matters at the base level – i.e. lacking any obvious deficiencies*. It does not mean that one should curtail a high level of achievement and commitment in an EC to be a joiner in other ECs.
*Examples of deficiencies: the math/science student who takes and earns A+ grades in all of the most advanced math/science courses but barely scrapes by with C- grades in the minimum possible English/history/LOTE courses, or the English/history/LOTE student who takes and earns A+ grades in all of the most advanced English/history/LOTE courses but barely scrapes by with C- grades in the minimum possible math/science courses.
@littlerobot I don’t know. I’m pretty open minded in terms of what kids do. But Rubik’s cube world champion seems like a pretty limited focus. If they were building cubes and having them do things or even training together for co-operation, I could see value. But,…I can see why that idea was suggested. Maybe I am missing higher value/application.
In the plus column, liked something achieved greatness in it and excelled. Certainly, this kid would stand out on the basis of the Rubiks cube. But I’d put it in the column with baton champion, or a Guiness World Record holder in some obscure category.
Wouldn’t the kid drop it anyway after several years? I guess I am just missing what the skill development is, year over year?
No idea…but it was the worst college advice I’d ever heard, to reiterate the thread title. I felt so bad for him…I think his parents thought “traditional endeavors” were what would get him into their Dream College for him.
Pretty similar to elite level sports. You do it for a number of years and then move onto other things. there is a large crossover with math abilities, spacial relationships and engineering and CS as a career. There are so many subsets - Blind solving, one handed, 3x3 up through the 7x7, Pyraminx, Square one etc. If you get a White coat you go on the tournament circuit if you want, sponsorships, etc. Like anything, when you scrape the surface it’s not as obscure as you might think. The Netflix movie was being filmed while we were there. Perhaps your attitude is common but I was super happy when my kid got into it. Maybe solving a cube in under 10 seconds isn’t a marketable skill in and of itself but it relates to other skills that are intrinsically desirable (being a good sport, setting goals, helping out other competitors etc.) and the competitions allow for a lot of camaraderie among kids who maybe aren’t on a typical track or - let’s face it - always that cool.
Seems like the parents may have missed the lesson that deep commitment to something in one area develops into passion in other areas.
Can’t totally fault parents either. The system has become crazy. Expecting 17 year old kids to have it all together and know what they want to be when they grow up is insane also, IMHO.
True, being a world champion in cubing does not have the higher value/application to college admission as being a world champion in a recruitable sport.
But it is unlikely that being an ordinary (not of interest for athletic recruiting) high school level player in a sport would be seen as being more impressive by a college admission reader than a world champion in cubing.
Straight up true. This entire process is mindboggling. Husband had to know what he wanted to do at 16 but at least if you get the points on your Leaving Cert (Ireland), you are guaranteed a position in your field of study. The benchmarks were there and understood.
true @ucbalumnus. I wasn’t comparing a sport to the cubing specifically because sports aid the college in many ways including raising money so college athletes are more valuable than most/many in the application cycle. I don’t have an issue with that ( I know many on CC do).
I can clearly see the value of teamwork, focus and dedication in a sport. Some of this will apply to the “cubers” But I don’t think I’d support the cubing as a parent as it seems a bit unidimensional to me.
Some sports or sport events are individual ones, where teamwork is less of or not a factor in the actual performance. In terms of parental support of a “unidimensional” activity, sports can be such a thing where some people obsess over the sport every chance they get.
Perhaps the difference is really whether the parents are at least somewhat interested in the activity that the kid is focused on, whether it is some type of sport or cubing or whatever. For a sports example, if a kid is an excellent soccer player, a parent who is interested in soccer may offer more opportunities (e.g. joining a travel team if the high school team and league are not that great, additional coaching sessions, etc.), but a parent who is not interested in soccer may not.
I think there’s value in the relative uniqueness to cubing. When my guy was applying to med school and now residency, it surprised him that interviewers brought up his juggling knives and fire - but it’s what caught their attention vs all the “usual” stuff he had on his CV.
Well-rounded can be a tip, when done right. But not just some random assortment of clubs or common things, the easy path.
Of course, some championship something can impress. But unilateral- or some limited thing one does- isn’t an “it” factor.
It’s hierarchical thinking, in a holistic context. And hey, CYA is always a better approach than assuming some “win” is all it takes, whether it’s a hobby or another sort of competition.
My kids have been involved in uni-dimensional activities(not sports related), individual sports, team sports and team sports that are also individual sports ( XC).
I am totally not a sports person. Have even laughed at how bad I am at knowing the rules. But, I’ve always believed that all these things develop the person. The kid should excel and be in the game ( or event). In it to win it. But teamwork and losing are also essential. You can’t learn more than losing the championship or winning it by a narrow victory.
We have seen so many parents yelling at their kids or getting too close to let the kid do what they need to do. We have a close friend who was not allowed to stand on the sidelines as he was disrupting the games. He’s a great guy but in this instance obnoxious.
Parental hangups seem to take center stage with parents obsessing that little Jane/Johnny’s ticket to life success wavers in winning some award. It doesn’t. But that doesn’t seem to stop people from pushing their kids. A lot. I’m sure it also reflects pride in their kids entwined with love for the sport/event. I’m sure the rubik’s cube kids parents are equal to the kids in little league. LOL>
It’s like being a chess champion. Like chess, to win in rubik’s you have to be excellent at solving problems – in this case, in 3-D. I imagine, you’d have to have amazing spatial skills – something you need to do well in physics, calc and higher math, high level chem, etc. So maybe it’s even more valuable than chess to prove academic chops.
It’s definitely not like baton champion. It has nothing to do with athleticism or artistic/performing arts skills and you also don’t need to be charismatic or have stage presence. It’s all intellectual/academic.
What I object to is kids do things these days for the sake of college admissions. Why can’t they just have fun, or pursue their interests, or even passion? Shouldn’t they do things that come more naturally to them? How many kids continue to pursue their pre-college activities in college and beyond? Is it the best thing to happen to a kid if his/her schedule is full with all the activities, leaving him/her with no time to reflect, in the best case, or mentally exhausted, in the worst?
Maybe what I said above is the worst advice. For college admission that is.
Actually the rubik’s cube solution is pretty limited unlike chess with has hundreds of thousands/millions of combos. It’s more about dexterity in the fingers than multi-lateral solutions. Most rubik cube folks can solve it very quickly. One of my nephews even does it by looking at it and then closing his eye. He is VERY mathematical. He seems to count/know something based on where he starts. He has taught younger family members to do it also.
Good points about baton.
I’ve seen so many posts here and on reddit from kids who get to their senior year and don’t get in to their “dream” schools and lament about how they wish they hadn’t spent so much time taking 10 AP classes and doing 14 ECs that they didn’t enjoy at all but felt they had to in order to build their resume.
Kids need to be told to enjoy HS. Join ECs because they like them, take a challenging but not overwhelming class load. Do well and they’ll get into a good college that will send them to a nice career and a good life.