<p>erlanger Quotes:
</p>
<p>Absolutely!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s why we carefully avoided the “SINK or SWIM” boarding schools.</p>
<p>DAndrew Quote:
</p>
<p>Misleading statement. See how DAndrew uses “some” in his statements which means his statements are exceptions, not the rule. Looks like DAndrew hasn’t met geewhiz kids from public schools like TJ and those that go to Stonehill college after spending 200K at a “SINK or SWIM” BS.</p>
<p>I think I know what erlanger is proposing in his struggling vs. thriving scenario. I have to agree that in my opinion, the goal is to find the right degree of challenge which causes a healthy amount of “frustration.” Too easy, and the student isn’t learning, too difficult and the student isn’t learning. It’s a tough balance.</p>
<p>One of my son’s friends’ parents insisted on her playing a sport, playing in the school’s top orchestra and all honors courses. Was she challenged? most certainly, but she was also over her head. Sure, being challenged in the formative years is an important opportunity which serves a student his or her whole life, but making things too difficult, to the point where someone is struggling to stay afloat, leads to erosion and chewing up of those brain neurochemicals (that affect mood, sleep, etc.) too quickly with bad results.</p>
<p>My 2 cents worth, which I will reiterate; apply to fits and not reaches or safeties. Doesn’t make it so daunting and lot more enjoyable.</p>
<p>Here’s what I got out of erlanger’s post #16:
In the search/app/selection process, be brutally honest about your kid’s actual ability (academically, athletically, musically, etc.), not some romanticized/inflated version that we as parents are inclined to err toward. And then consider what environment might be best for his/her abilities.</p>
<p>Using sports (which is totally NOT our family’s bag) as an example: If your kid is strong but not D1 material, is it better for him/her to start at a school with a good but not top team or to sit on the bench at a school loaded with D1 prospects? </p>
<p>The answer definitely depends on a family’s/student’s POV, but I’d be inclined to go with the first school.</p>
<p>OK. erlanger, it seems I am the only one who mis-read your post, but I do respect your perspective knowing that you actually do have a kid struggling in a top school. Some of us here either didn’t have to go through that “pain” or didn’t dare to try it out. Who am I to say something smart for stuff I’ve never had any experience with? :)</p>
<p>SevenDad:</p>
<p>In my son’s experience as a three-season athlete at a school with recruited athletes, many headed to college athletic team, it’s not so much sitting on the bench, as competing actively…but on jv, rather than varsity. </p>
<p>And in his case, I think that having that pile of quality athletes ahead of him has been much better for him than his former life as top of a pile of mediocre athletes. He’s achieved more athletically and learned to recognize both his strengths and his limitations as an athlete (and a scholar, for that matter, though that’s off-topic). When you’re always on the top, it’s sometimes hard to see either…you’re better than most everyone else without really having to try, and so you miss that opportunity for growth and self-analysis. And when he ended up as one of the top varsity guys in one of his sports, it felt REALLY good.</p>
<p>So I agree with D’Andrew that middle of the pack isn’t always a bad thing at all…as long as there’s something the kid can find to excel at.</p>
<p>Re: SevenDad and erlanger’s nods to honest assessment of our kids, this is where we found using a consultant well worth the expense. I had been through sink or swim myself and did NOT want that for DC, but the consultant confirmed for us exactly what good matches would be with a strong academic challenge, but at schools with some safety nets in place so if the going gets tough he isn’t left by himself out on an island. DC’s admission results, and our early comfort with his choice, seem to be bearing out so far that it was a worthwhile investment (relative) to the cost of the education to make sure he’s landed in a proper fit for him.</p>
<p>The problem with the term “sink or swim” is that it inevitably seems to confuse academic rigor with the amount of academic support available. Using PelicanDad’s consultant’s words, I don’t think there are really any schools anymore that leave kids “left by themselves out on an island.” I’d agree that some schools offer larger and more padded safety nets than others, but I don’t think there are any that just leave kids out there balancing on the high wire over a concrete floor. </p>
<p>A school like Exeter, for example, can be very academically rigorous, with high expectations for all students, and still provide counseling, advising, study skill classes, etc. Not all that many kids sink, really; the better cliche here might be whether your kid prefers to be a big fish in a small pond or vice-versa (or a big fish in a big pond or small fish in small pond, for that matter). They’re still in the water, but everybody’s swimming.</p>
<p>To be honest, I don’t really know anyone in real life who is “sinking” and often wonder what “swim or sink” means. I <em>imagine</em> there can be students who are incapable of handling the rigorous academics plus living among highly talented and driven peers. To me it IS a perforce example of “unfit”, but why blaming it on the school? It is indeed deep water, so if you don’t/can’t swim you will sink. The only difference with a pond is the water in a pond is not that deep so if you can’t swim you can still stand up and the water is not over your head.</p>
<p>DAndrew Quote:
Well this isn’t the first time. :D</p>
<p>
If I were in this situation, I would definitely refer to the dictionary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like the musings of a Philosopher gone wrong!</p>
<p>@classical and DAndrew: well, this topic was touched on briefly in another thread recently. Each school community DOES have its own personality, and if the AOs have been there for a while and are good, they know the “type” or even “types” they are looking for and think will fit in well at their school. Oftentimes we’re less objective as parents, driven by name recognition, the fact that the same institution was good–or bad-- for us, convenience, etc. Again, in retrospect last year, in all interview situations I followed after DC and the AO’s immediate feedback about DC & their school turned out to be on the money in terms of being on par with admit decisions 3 & 4 months later. Fit works both ways, for sure. And these consultants, in most cases, are former AOs themselves, so the good ones understand the typologies that generally differentiate the schools.</p>
<p>Invent: The dictionary of cliches? </p>
<p>I agree, D’Andrew. But I don’t see it as sinking when, for example, a student used to getting A’s is suddenly getting B’s and C’s. Nor do I think it’s a bad thing if my kid doesn’t make varsity in all his sports. These days, both might just be a healthy reality check that, in the end, build character even as they dampen self-esteem. </p>
<p>That said, I’m all about picking the right pond for each fish. And Pelican Dad, I can certainly see the value of consultants–just questioned the wording-- that some schools have a “sink or swim” mentality. As you point out, I think all schools do their best to choose a student body they genuinely believe will succeed. Sometimes things go wrong for reasons no one could anticipate, but as others have pointed out, the failure of kids to thrive is often a result of being attracted to a name rather than the real school behind the name.</p>
<p>Some schools are just so much “harder” than others. Like with colleges, everyone knows MIT and Princeton are HARD - they are more rigorous and they are filled with smart, driven and hard working students. In there everyone would feel they are “sinking” one way or another, but they are not. In most cases, perspective is the key. Of course, if you seriously can’t handle being a smaller fish in a big pond, then yes stay away from it - as long as you can.</p>
<p>I like staying away from it for good. It’s healthy. :D</p>
<p>90% of the student body won’t be in the school’s top decile. Half of the students will be below the school’s average. Even though the big preps don’t rank their students, when seniors apply to colleges, the colleges are able to compare students from the same school. </p>
<p>If acceptance to an elite college (HYP etc) is the goal, every family should at least consider what they’ll do, and how they’ll react, if their child is below average in his class. It’s quite possible for a student to be at the top of a local public middle school, only to discover that he’s not at the top of a highly selective high school. </p>
<p>@Classicalmama, I think it’s sinking if the student perceives it as sinking. Some people only encounter the sensation in college. Only then do they learn that they’ll always be someone smarter than you (more athletic, more energetic, more charming, more organized, better prepared, wealthier, whiter teeth, taller, better looking, etc.) Most students adapt, find their niche, and do very well. Some students have great difficulties adapting. </p>
<p>RBGG’s point about parental expectations is on-target. If parents demand a child work harder, and do more, but the child can’t meet parental expectations and sleep, that’s a problem. Some of the schools have brutal grading scales, and very busy schedules. </p>
<p>@Ops, I see your point. I agree fit is exceedingly important. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s easy to gauge a school’s fit/reach/safety with the first child. By the third or fourth, it’s easier.</p>
<p>I’ll admit it is not easy in finding a fit. In fact, one never really knows until after a few weeks at the school. It takes a lot of perception with your child and the school. My wife gets credit for recognizing fit better than me. So much so that she saw no sense in applying to no more than three schools the first time and only two for the next guy. Since she never reads this site and I can admit she is better than me, in that department. I still don’t agree to having applied to that few schools. I know there could have been more possible fits. But, she was pretty confident that the schools would agree with her. No it’s not easy finding fit. We saw more schools than we applied to and spoke to a lot of current and past parents and alumni of schools. I grew up with DOA of one school mentioned here and never even looked at the particular school. I might also add that the schools are pretty perceptive themselves and they wouldn’t accept a kid if they didn’t think he or she could be an asset to the class. Then again they’re not always spot on either. But, focusing on fit as oppose to name notoriety or lack thereof for safety sake sure cuts down on unnecessary drama.</p>
<p>btw,i often have friends that tell me Bs + good activities/leaderships at top BS would get into ivy league and pretty top colleges like John Hopkins
I have a friend who is solid B + leadership and got in wharton - many like that</p>
<p>one thing not discussed is how many people from same school that are legacies in top colleges. For schools like SPS that have large number of legacies at ivy colleges (i read on cc here 40%) , sometime there non-legacies students have trouble getting in, since each top college will only take a certain amount from each BS. So many many ways kids are competing against its own pools and kids from same school</p>
<p>hkdad, check out matriculationstats.org. I don’t think the differences among various schools can be explained away by larger/smaller number of legacies in these schools. Then of course some argue those who get in selective colleges would’ve done so in ANY school anyway. They are just “ivy material”, that is all. To me, it is more complicated than that. IMHO, those who have the potential to be SUPER stars in their local schools actually hurt their chances by attending a competitive BS. However, those who are smart and motivated but have limited opportunities to shine in their local schools or have parents who for one reason or another are very “hands-off” will be helped in a well-equipped BS. </p>
<p>Don’t think you get a better chance by attending a less competitive BS. They are still BS and the competition for a spot in top colleges will be just as intense. They may have fewer ivy legacies (which is doubtful) or students with strong hooks, but then the percentage of students getting in those top colleges is a lot lower too. Take a random example, Andover has 18.4% going to HYPSM, and Taft has 4.7%. Which is easier, to be among Taft’s 4.7% or Andover’s 18.4%? Hard to say isn’t it.</p>
<p>Parents who look at stats like that are often the ones who require that the College Counselors then mediate their expectations come time to apply to college and are angry because they thought choosing HADES increased their odds.</p>
<p>At Taft, for instance, there were 125 colleges that came to the school’s college fair in a school with only 150 seniors. The competition for those students is fierce as are the scholarship dollars to attract them away from competitors. </p>
<p>There are also a lot of HADES alum who put their kids in schools other than HADES having realized that there’s more to BS than an IVY bound focus.</p>
<p>So, statistically - you might stand a “better” chance of matriculating to HYPSM at a school with lower stats (I know that sounds counterintuitive) because fewer students in general apply given other options. And because the school is more well-rounded in helping students select colleges that “fit.”</p>
<p>Suppose 8 apply AND 7 are accepted out of a class of 150. That may beat applying to HYPSM from a graduating class of 300 in which the 200 apply to HYPSM’s and only 44 get a spot. </p>
<p>Just sayin’. Need to know how many applied and how many were accepted to gauge success. But to each his own.</p>
<p>Blech, focus on HYPSM gives all parents a bad name. I hear again and again how the college counselors spend so much energy “moderating” (parental) expectations, that frankly I am dreading interacting with them at all!! I want to hear about my DD’s realistic prospects, but without cynicism and an agenda targeted towards the crazy parents or driven by the school’s desire for high acceptance stats. Is there no integrity left in the process? HYPSM is a crapshoot for any kid from any school these days, and while I myself am a graduate of one of those letters, I want DD to find her own way–I am just already doubting that the process will be honestly driven by D’s desires and needs.</p>