<p>Okay, seems like fenway wants to have a discussion about race and college admissions which I’m sure exists on some other posts, and might get this one shut down if we go all in with it. Race and ethnicity are things we can’t control, and short of taking a university to court on the matter (as some have done), I don’t think it makes sense to stress oneself out about it. Best to try to work with the situation as it exists – and include a broad range of colleges and universities in the consideration set. No need stressing on CC on that particular issue. </p>
<p>Honestly, parents have gone crazy! My mom’s friend had forced her kids into doing tennis, violin, singing, orchestra, debate and etc! I know one of my mom’s friends whose daughters were in karate for 10+ years and still didn’t really make it to the big name schools. I on the other hand was never forced by my parents to pursue a certain activities. My life consisted of my own realistic passions of doing community service and such a small passion helped me to get into UC Berkeley this year. The friends were shocked as they believed how did I get it :P. </p>
<p>However, moral of the story. Do not force your kids what to do parents. Let them branch out and do what they want to do. Or else, the “passion” of 10 years really doesn’t show in your child’s personal essays if they’ve been hating that extracurricular activity for 10 years.</p>
<p>P.S. I know somebody whose mom read a book on how to get their kid into an ivy when she was pregnant! So, for the next 17 years that kid was forced to do extracurriculars he didn’t like and did make it into an ivy,but ended up hating his own mother. I think a child’s love is very important <3</p>
<p>While demonstrated commitment to one activity is helpful, as you know it takes a whole lot more than 10+ yrs in karate to get into good schools.</p>
<p>No. Our family is blessed to have a D1 scholarship athlete kid and an Ivy League kid in the household. I know those things don’t mean much in the overall scheme of things but we feel both humble and proud of them.</p>
<p>Congrats on a D1 athlete and an Ivy kid. Not sure why one poster’s opinion or comment is seen as indicative of CC in some sort of totality. Seems to be a bit of an overgeneralization. Comments that directly or indirectly suggest discrimination are going to be sensitive issues and potential hot buttons. So it should come as no surprise that it may evoke a strong response. Bringing up potential racial discrimination in the CDS and then chastising posters responses could be seen as baiting by some. Just an observation, not an accusation. Please don’t go after my jugular ;)</p>
<p>Apologies, but I have no idea what you are talking about, if you are talking to me. A “board nanny”. ? Really? Thats kinda rude. And ironic. And you think these comments are not baiting or condescending? Really now.
Welcome to cc. You are a relative newbie. But the fingerwagging at posters usually evokes a reaction. No one said any posts are improper, but comments like “This explains a lot to me about both this thread and College Confidential in general” are going to get a response.</p>
<p>Like thats any better?? Good heavens. My post at 10:19 was carefully and delicately written, but seemed to have evoked an overreaction. Not sure what thats all about. To quote you, " Here is a chance for constructive comments". … “@Pizzagirl Thanks for your constructive suggestions. Hope others follow your lead.”</p>
<p>@fenwaypark - Here is one such CDS: US Berkeley, page 6 (a top 20 school - doubt you will find any in a top 10 school, but I have not looked though, however, top 10s are all private)</p>
<p>OK, I meant it as a joke because Berkeley is forced by law to do it, as is all the UCs. </p>
<p>I really think the subject should be dropped though because it only degenerates into two fighting camps of those who support such consideration and want to defend and those who want a blind system. Will not get anywhere, no matter how salient the discussion is to have.</p>
<p>Now the irony, not considering race brings on a craziness of its own and alleviates nothing. Instead, the people who want the consideration get pissed off and off to the races again.</p>
<p>You may want to repost in the special race in admissions thread.</p>
<p>Fenway, the problem is not one of being offensive but one that intimates that the thread should remain on rigid rails and that one knows what the topic is. </p>
<p>The best way to redirect a thread is not by arguing about the perceived off-topic but by presenting a better and more interesting angle. Threads do, however, tend to run out of steam and pugilists.</p>
<p>I thought the issue of CDS/ race-ethnic status was relevant to the portion of the thread where I brought it up. I’ve got no axe to grind or agenda on the issue.</p>
<p>From this point on, I think the best way to get the issue dropped here is for posters to ignore it and not keep bringing it up.</p>
<p>So as an aside, its now safe to assume that side tongue-in-cheek comments/ nicknames for schools is ok, to lighten up a conversation. (like Work Forest and Fairleigh Ridiculous)? FWIW, the Emory one didnt offend me, and I am a transplanted Yankee</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s that recent or “most”, but it certainly is louder, like everything else. In the cultural context:</p>
<ol>
<li> College is a “goal” rather than a “path”.</li>
<li> A diploma is the same as know-how.</li>
<li> “Dream Schools”. Like birthday parties, proms and weddings have evolved into coronations.</li>
<li> We’ve “evolved” from a “I’m worthless” to a “I am special” mentality. The sad part is often the latter validation relies on a negation of others’ specialness, which extends to the fruit of our loins.</li>
<li> Many parents are having children at a later age than previous generations. So the cost of college cuts into the parents’ retirement nest egg.</li>
</ol>
<p>There’s others. And maybe it’s not a bad thing that educators and administrators are kept on their toes. Hopefully, the cosmic balance will ultimately be achieved.</p>
<p>i understand where OP is coming from. you see this a lot in certain communities, especially with the upper-middle-class yuppie set in bigger cities. however, as others have stated, it is also a regional thing. where i went to high school the majority of students (and their parents) were satisfied to attend our state schools, especially the 2 flagship state schools which are really great schools anyway. even students with the stats and qualifications to apply and be accepted elsewhere (including ivy-level candidates!) were mostly content to stay in state. to be honest, most people were flabbergasted that i wouldn’t want to attend one of our flagship state universities! i was one of the ones who left the state - and after encountering the types of people OP is speaking of i became ever so grateful for the non-prestige obsessed environment i grew up in.</p>
<p>those types of parents annoy the hell out of me too. i work in a relatively wealthy area now and see some of what you mean. i hate to sound mean, but they tend to raise entitled brats who don’t really know the meaning of hard work, respect, or self-sufficiency. i know i sound like an old fart saying that but…i attended college with some of the products of that parenting-style and i didn’t like them then either!</p>
<p>this is not to say that all parents who gun for their kids to attend an ivy or elite school are like that, but if you know the types of people OP is talking about, well…you understand.</p>
<p>Whatever happened to enjoying life? I’d rather have my kid enjoy his youth and early adulthood doing what she/he wants (in terms of classes and ECs) and doing my best to help them excel in what they choose. I would prefer them to enjoy their time and have time for self learning, reflecting, and experiencing life than forcing them to play violin for 5 hours everyday or their summers in programs they don’t want to do. Your kid has about 80 years in this world, why would you waste almost a quarter on it on forcing your vision of what is a good future and life is? All for just a paper with whatever school you deem appropriate’s name on it.</p>
<p>The most interesting and successful (not to mention happy) I’ve met always seem to be people who didn’t spend their whole time stating a textbook.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, if your kid does want to do a million ECs, all APs, etc (and he truly wants to), let him/her do it. Just don’t force your dreams or your regrets on him/her. Didn’t get into Harvard when you were younger? Too bad, that doesn’t mean you have to force your kid to get in to feel better about yourself.</p>
<p>Just returned from a sporting event, where I listened to a bunch of moms and dads discuss their views on parenting high school kids. I admit I lean more toward the crazy end of the parenting continuum than the very laid back end, but what makes me personally a little nuts is a disappearing reasonable middle ground of child-rearing. It seems that the reaction to today’s perceived “crazy” parenting is a complete laissez faire attitude that essentially means condoning whatever makes the kids happy and comfortable. If you have a self-motivated, internally driven kid, that can work out just fine. However, the parents I listened to today seem to think overlooking laziness and lack of direction is a parenting virtue, because it means mom and dad aren’t pushing too much and aren’t trying to live vicariously through their kids. They think it’s a sign of enlightenment not to care all that much about anything academic or extracurricular. They laugh and say stuff like “They’re only 15/16/17/18 year old kids,” “It’s all good,” (when I’d call it terrible), “It’s just high school,” “This won’t matter in ten years,” etc. Can’t you be moderate in your parenting expectations yet still place importance on how your child conducts himself relative to his ability? Honestly, if my kid performed the way some of their kids did today, I would have been angry and upset. Nope, “it’s all good.”</p>
</p>