If doing research in high school is unfair and puts poorer students at a disadvantage, what extracurriculars are fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extracurricular activities are not "fair". Students with access to resources will always have more access to extracurricular activities. Music sports, dance, science art, drama, writing, travel, etc. All of these are going to be more available to students that have the money to finance access.

How does writing cost money? hiring instructor?

I don't know if this is always true but generally speaking private schools do a much better job of teaching good writing than public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how colleges claim to care about equity (ie scrape SAT) and then love published student research.

Most high schoolers who did research I know about have academic center physician parents, or in a minority of cases, donors to academic medical centers or parents that work at a national lab. High schoolers are not getting research gigs unconnected when even they’re competitive for college students.

They don't love published student research because they realize that just like the 'non-profit' it is typically a scam.

They actually do. Try to cope harder.

DP: Used to work as a counselor and both ‘research’ and ‘non-profit’ have become ECs which are highly scrutinized and generally discounted. If genuine with supportable results they can be excellent but they are mostly generic and can actually be detrimental if they appear to be done for admissions purposes.

Right now kids with deep and interesting ECs are getting the best results. Kids don’t have to be real ‘pointy’ but did they do something that they could have a deep and interesting conversation on?

This just isn’t my observation at all for this year and last year. When did you observe this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how colleges claim to care about equity (ie scrape SAT) and then love published student research.

Most high schoolers who did research I know about have academic center physician parents, or in a minority of cases, donors to academic medical centers or parents that work at a national lab. High schoolers are not getting research gigs unconnected when even they’re competitive for college students.

They don't love published student research because they realize that just like the 'non-profit' it is typically a scam.

They actually do. Try to cope harder.

DP: Used to work as a counselor and both ‘research’ and ‘non-profit’ have become ECs which are highly scrutinized and generally discounted. If genuine with supportable results they can be excellent but they are mostly generic and can actually be detrimental if they appear to be done for admissions purposes.

Right now kids with deep and interesting ECs are getting the best results. Kids don’t have to be real ‘pointy’ but did they do something that they could have a deep and interesting conversation on?

I would not listen to this poster. There are a lot of high schools that have science research programs that develop students interest in science research over several years.

It was incredibly helpful to my students and to many other students that I know both for learning about science research and for admission to college to continue their studies.

Many high schools in my area offer programs like this. The anti research poster seems to be unfamiliar with these types of academic programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extracurricular activities are not "fair". Students with access to resources will always have more access to extracurricular activities. Music sports, dance, science art, drama, writing, travel, etc. All of these are going to be more available to students that have the money to finance access.

How does writing cost money? hiring instructor?

Around me, kids get sent off to very very expensive arts camps in the summer to learn, writing and all kinds of other things.

Training/Tutoring can help, but like Writing, Sports, Math, etc. these need talent.
Well, I guess for college admission, you don't need to be at top. Like non-profit, once you get in, who cares.

What are you talking about? If you're trying to use your extracurriculars to help you gain admission to college, the students that invest in their natural talent to get to improve to get to the top can get recruited or get admitted to a more competitive college. Those that can't or don't invest in honing their talents, won't be able to use talent in the same way.

People with natural talent require a lot of dedication and practice and time to develop it. That goes for writing or hitting a baseball and everything else.

Jane Austen’s family didn’t need to spend any money for her to hone her talent for writing. She just…wrote.

She probably also spent endless hours reading, which most likely helped her become an amazing writer.

[Anonymous]

in order to help kids without privilege, the best avenue is educating parents. maybe a parent mentorship by school guidance counselors because a lot of opportunity is missed because of lack of knowledge.

or maybe a college program for less privileged kids starting in middle school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how colleges claim to care about equity (ie scrape SAT) and then love published student research.

Most high schoolers who did research I know about have academic center physician parents, or in a minority of cases, donors to academic medical centers or parents that work at a national lab. High schoolers are not getting research gigs unconnected when even they’re competitive for college students.

They don't love published student research because they realize that just like the 'non-profit' it is typically a scam.

They actually do. Try to cope harder.

DP: Used to work as a counselor and both ‘research’ and ‘non-profit’ have become ECs which are highly scrutinized and generally discounted. If genuine with supportable results they can be excellent but they are mostly generic and can actually be detrimental if they appear to be done for admissions purposes.

Right now kids with deep and interesting ECs are getting the best results. Kids don’t have to be real ‘pointy’ but did they do something that they could have a deep and interesting conversation on?

This just isn’t my observation at all for this year and last year. When did you observe this?

Over the past several cycles, especially for 'non-profits'. I'm in the bay area and admissions for our kids from top schools are tough enough because of the competition. I am also seeing kids with 'research' or 'internships' not outperforming especially when the internship is at a parents company or former company. AO's can figure it out and they do make assumptions. There are exceptions of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im so happy at how much my kids have benefitted from their advantages. There seems to be some new education initiative to prop up URMs every other day. It almost always does the opposite and sometimes even degrades general education outcomes for all who arent paying attention. The harder these people try to prop URMs up, the larger the gap grows, and I celebrate this.

Yeah, we’re all aware you don’t like minorities.

Nope. thats not it, but definitely an expected response. I would never support a system that would actively work against my own kids interests, sometimes even with my own tax dollars.

You literally said “the larger the gap grows (between URMs and non-URMs), I celebrate it.” You’re not some victim, just a disgusting, racist loser.

Funny though. These DEI efforts are many times racist. It’s great watching racism fail.

You could oppose race-based initiatives and still not celebrate URM falling behind. Well, I mean, normal and decent people could. Not you.

But is celebrating the gap closing on race based initiatives okay?

I will always celebrate the failure of a system that disadvantages my kid based on the color of their skin or the job their parents have.

My kids can’t choose their skin color or their parents jobs. The other side of the URM coin is not a bunch of millionaires. It’s usually lower middle to middle class.

Racial preferences are illegal now and more colleges will hopefully start complying with the law as the years go by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how colleges claim to care about equity (ie scrape SAT) and then love published student research.

Most high schoolers who did research I know about have academic center physician parents, or in a minority of cases, donors to academic medical centers or parents that work at a national lab. High schoolers are not getting research gigs unconnected when even they’re competitive for college students.

They don't love published student research because they realize that just like the 'non-profit' it is typically a scam.

They actually do. Try to cope harder.

DP: Used to work as a counselor and both ‘research’ and ‘non-profit’ have become ECs which are highly scrutinized and generally discounted. If genuine with supportable results they can be excellent but they are mostly generic and can actually be detrimental if they appear to be done for admissions purposes.

Right now kids with deep and interesting ECs are getting the best results. Kids don’t have to be real ‘pointy’ but did they do something that they could have a deep and interesting conversation on?

I would not listen to this poster. There are a lot of high schools that have science research programs that develop students interest in science research over several years.

It was incredibly helpful to my students and to many other students that I know both for learning about science research and for admission to college to continue their studies.

Many high schools in my area offer programs like this. The anti research poster seems to be unfamiliar with these types of academic programs.

+1

Does this person even have teens?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:in order to help kids without privilege, the best avenue is educating parents. maybe a parent mentorship by school guidance counselors because a lot of opportunity is missed because of lack of knowledge.

or maybe a college program for less privileged kids starting in middle school

That’s considered DEI so frowned upon these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College admission should be lottery-based after meeting minimum quals.

Private schools get their own priorities and preferences.

+1

Although in this era of fascism who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im so happy at how much my kids have benefitted from their advantages. There seems to be some new education initiative to prop up URMs every other day. It almost always does the opposite and sometimes even degrades general education outcomes for all who arent paying attention. The harder these people try to prop URMs up, the larger the gap grows, and I celebrate this.

I am so happy I benefitted from URM and low income programs. Now my kids do not need any advantages and I am able to afford their extra curriculars and test prep. Nevertheless, I am aware there are many kids who, could contribute to our tax base in the future and be leaders in our communities, but for reasons beyond their control, they cannot access higher education. I am not an a$$hole who would pull the ladder up behind me. I wish there were more programs that supported these students. If my kid ends up at JMU instead of VT because a low income URM “took their spot”, so be it. My kids will be fine wherever they land, as they will always have our support and connections.

You think you got into VT because of racial preferences and low income programs?
And now your kids don't need to go to VT because you got to go there?
There is another family out there whose kids don't have that cushion because you got it through racial preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how colleges claim to care about equity (ie scrape SAT) and then love published student research.

Most high schoolers who did research I know about have academic center physician parents, or in a minority of cases, donors to academic medical centers or parents that work at a national lab. High schoolers are not getting research gigs unconnected when even they’re competitive for college students.

They don't love published student research because they realize that just like the 'non-profit' it is typically a scam.

They actually do. Try to cope harder.

DP: Used to work as a counselor and both ‘research’ and ‘non-profit’ have become ECs which are highly scrutinized and generally discounted. If genuine with supportable results they can be excellent but they are mostly generic and can actually be detrimental if they appear to be done for admissions purposes.

Right now kids with deep and interesting ECs are getting the best results. Kids don’t have to be real ‘pointy’ but did they do something that they could have a deep and interesting conversation on?

I would not listen to this poster. There are a lot of high schools that have science research programs that develop students interest in science research over several years.

It was incredibly helpful to my students and to many other students that I know both for learning about science research and for admission to college to continue their studies.

Many high schools in my area offer programs like this. The anti research poster seems to be unfamiliar with these types of academic programs.

+1

Does this person even have teens?

Who knows? Regardless, the op has some weird anti -research agenda and apparently very little knowledge about very typical high school programs that exist for students that would like to explore science research.

Obviously not every high school has such a program but the op seems to be completely ignorant of their existence at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im so happy at how much my kids have benefitted from their advantages. There seems to be some new education initiative to prop up URMs every other day. It almost always does the opposite and sometimes even degrades general education outcomes for all who arent paying attention. The harder these people try to prop URMs up, the larger the gap grows, and I celebrate this.

I am so happy I benefitted from URM and low income programs. Now my kids do not need any advantages and I am able to afford their extra curriculars and test prep. Nevertheless, I am aware there are many kids who, could contribute to our tax base in the future and be leaders in our communities, but for reasons beyond their control, they cannot access higher education. I am not an a$$hole who would pull the ladder up behind me. I wish there were more programs that supported these students. If my kid ends up at JMU instead of VT because a low income URM “took their spot”, so be it. My kids will be fine wherever they land, as they will always have our support and connections.

You think you got into VT because of racial preferences and low income programs?
And now your kids don't need to go to VT because you got to go there?
There is another family out there whose kids don't have that cushion because you got it through racial preferences.

I didn’t go to VT. I went to a small directional low rated university out West. My point was that if my kid ends up at JMU over VT, because a URM “took their spot”, so be it, they will be fine. We can support them all the way. Why? Because I was able to get a degree from “pudunk” university as a URM, that still opened doors for me. Had I not had some DEI support along the way, I wouldn’t be here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College admission should be lottery-based after meeting minimum quals.

Private schools get their own priorities and preferences.

+1

Although in this era of fascism who knows.

What a drama queen!