No, going to more competitive high schools in wealthier areas do not give you more opportunities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate how stupid people are. People love to say you are so lucky to grow up in X place because the schools are good and have so many opportunities. Like hello, do you not understand that opportunities in those schools aren’t open for all students?

Sure, some high schools have more sports like lacrosse or wrestling, but what good does that do if you still need to play since 5 to make the JV team? Most students can’t access those opportunities. Likewise, extracurricular like robotics and band are way more selective at competitive schools.


Students at poorer and less competitive schools literally have more opportunities because things like sports or robotics take anyone

When more than 20% of your classmates are behind, you will also be behind, just due to the reduced pace of teaching. So unless the school has dedicated track separated learning (which many are ditching) you are still better off at the ‘wealthier’ school. The fact that your kid did not get into, say, robotics club this year means his math classmates are already advanced in coding which is a huge advantage over a poorer school. To spin that as a disadvantage is truly ivory tower level cluelessness. Get a grip.

In large school districts, even "poorer" school still get all the AP options. So there is absolutely "tracking" in HS. My DDs took their PE classes over the summer virtually and the rest of their classes were honors or AP level, including select/audition choirs. They had an excellent experience at their "poor" HS and they were able to play on varsity sports all four years.

AP classes are not the same. Even if your anecdote was representative, it still wouldn't counter the PP's claim

The exam scores and college outcomes say otherwiseZ