Thrivers (book), raising kids in a pressure cooker area

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To what extent do you think that laid back parents can raise laid back kids in this regard, even when surrounded by pressure-cooker families? DH and I are pretty non-competitive when it comes to work and school. We both have jobs that are intellectually stimulating, we read a lot, have academic and social interests, but couldn't care less if our kids are at the top of their class/make the competitive sports team/ etc. I like to think we can raise kids who don't feel the need to keep up with their peers in some of the ways being discussed here, but they're still young and so I don't know if we're being totally naive.

I think you can but you have to be intentional about it, recognize that - especially once in middle and high school -- they will be getting all these competition messages from school/peers so you need to talk about that and reinforce that it is ok to go against the flow.

DH and I are both pretty laid back people but I think could have easily fallen into the go-go ECs mindset prevalent in the area but our kids are very strong willed and from an early age insisted on doing things their way.

DD was the only little girl who didn't do soccer or t-ball or dance or any of the standard little-kid activities. She went to two dance classes at 3 years old and then refused to go again. She just wanted to play outside or do art so we followed her interests, went hiking a lot, signed her up for art classes. Eventually she asked to do a sport and did fencing for a while but again no interest in doing it at an intense level, much to her coach's disappointment. As a teen she's still mainly interested in hiking, nature-related volunteer work, and art. But, she doesn't want to do art at school where it will become an obligation rather than a relaxing hobby.

She was always a top student and we never pushed, were fine with her approach to ECs, are happy for her to go to any college that fits her interests and ambitions (which will not be T20-type schools). Still, she had a massive melt down early this year about the pressure to get into a top school, to get all As in a bunch of AP classes, worrying that she's falling behind because she's getting a B in a 10th grade AP class. I realized that while we are not putting that pressure on her it is endemic in her high school. So we had to talk about the ridiculous expectations people put on kids, that you can get into a good college without doing all this stuff and that even those who practically kill themselves doing all of it are still a long shot for those tippy-top ranked schools. We encouraged her to pick APs for 11th just for the subjects she loves and buck the expectation of her peers that you take 4+ APs in junior year. She seems to be feeling better but we continue to talk about it.

DS also took his own path with ECs, preferring to spend time on a couple things at a hobby level, refusing any competitive engagement with them. He still had plenty to talk about in college essays and is happily going to Virginia Tech in the Fall. He had excellent grades and a bunch of AP classes but only in subjects of interest and never even took an honors-level science class because those required a science project and he hates doing science projects.

I just started reading this book and it seems like we did do a lot of what they suggest to nurture self-confidence (that's the first chapter)... Notice what actually interests your kids and nurture that, don't emphasize competition, provide space to focus on one thing.

This is such a helpful response. Thank you! You sound like great parents, and I hope to provide a similar home environment and support for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To what extent do you think that laid back parents can raise laid back kids in this regard, even when surrounded by pressure-cooker families? DH and I are pretty non-competitive when it comes to work and school. We both have jobs that are intellectually stimulating, we read a lot, have academic and social interests, but couldn't care less if our kids are at the top of their class/make the competitive sports team/ etc. I like to think we can raise kids who don't feel the need to keep up with their peers in some of the ways being discussed here, but they're still young and so I don't know if we're being totally naive.

I think you can but you have to be intentional about it, recognize that - especially once in middle and high school -- they will be getting all these competition messages from school/peers so you need to talk about that and reinforce that it is ok to go against the flow.

DH and I are both pretty laid back people but I think could have easily fallen into the go-go ECs mindset prevalent in the area but our kids are very strong willed and from an early age insisted on doing things their way.

DD was the only little girl who didn't do soccer or t-ball or dance or any of the standard little-kid activities. She went to two dance classes at 3 years old and then refused to go again. She just wanted to play outside or do art so we followed her interests, went hiking a lot, signed her up for art classes. Eventually she asked to do a sport and did fencing for a while but again no interest in doing it at an intense level, much to her coach's disappointment. As a teen she's still mainly interested in hiking, nature-related volunteer work, and art. But, she doesn't want to do art at school where it will become an obligation rather than a relaxing hobby.

She was always a top student and we never pushed, were fine with her approach to ECs, are happy for her to go to any college that fits her interests and ambitions (which will not be T20-type schools). Still, she had a massive melt down early this year about the pressure to get into a top school, to get all As in a bunch of AP classes, worrying that she's falling behind because she's getting a B in a 10th grade AP class. I realized that while we are not putting that pressure on her it is endemic in her high school. So we had to talk about the ridiculous expectations people put on kids, that you can get into a good college without doing all this stuff and that even those who practically kill themselves doing all of it are still a long shot for those tippy-top ranked schools. We encouraged her to pick APs for 11th just for the subjects she loves and buck the expectation of her peers that you take 4+ APs in junior year. She seems to be feeling better but we continue to talk about it.

DS also took his own path with ECs, preferring to spend time on a couple things at a hobby level, refusing any competitive engagement with them. He still had plenty to talk about in college essays and is happily going to Virginia Tech in the Fall. He had excellent grades and a bunch of AP classes but only in subjects of interest and never even took an honors-level science class because those required a science project and he hates doing science projects.

I just started reading this book and it seems like we did do a lot of what they suggest to nurture self-confidence (that's the first chapter)... Notice what actually interests your kids and nurture that, don't emphasize competition, provide space to focus on one thing.

This is such a helpful response. Thank you! You sound like great parents, and I hope to provide a similar home environment and support for my kids.

Thanks. One other thing to note that I think was important when they were younger (ES school age) was to prioritize play time with friends. We made sure to schedule playdates regularly and leave time in our weekends for that. It meant the super-competitive, my-kid-must-play-3-sports-families fell out of our social circle because their kids had no time to play and that was all for the best. Both kids still prioritize spending time with friends. DS has a close circle of friends and has navigated well the transition from one friend group when he was younger to a different group in HS. DD has had the same three BFFs since elementary school and keeps close to one even though she moved to a different city.

I also think with all of this it's important that parents model the same thing. Spend time with your own friends. Have hobbies. If you don't have time for a hobby because you are spending all your time running your kids all over to their activities then they are probably too busy.

[Anonymous]

I think you can do real low-key if you truly do not care about getting your kid into a top college (like it would be cool with you but you'd be absolutely cool with something else too) and are just really confident your kid will be just fine. I have not yet reached that stage.

I admit that there is a little parental ego in there, but there is also the realization that it does matter. Good colleges give you a leg up. It's a competitive world out there and at some point, my kids will have to compete. They're not going to have trust funds that set them up for life.

I'd like to not play the game, but I have seen others go ahead of me, and I see that it works for these kids whose parents have pushed them a lot with carefully crafted activities and academics. Parents wouldn't do it if it didn't work. This is the message that colleges are sending.

So like a lot of parents out there, I have taken the middle road, not dropping out of the game, but giving a lot of thought as to when to push, what routes to take and when to say "no, that's insane, I'm not pushing my kid to do that in second grade."

I wish it could be like I was a kid and we really didn't think about college until HS, and it was still fine. I got into a top college. In the end, students today are no smarter, more ready for the world than they were 20 years ago despite all the "accomplishments". But it's hard to push back against societal forces on your own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it sounds like this area. It's really weird to me. Kids are expected to be on "swim team" and swim competitively from a young age. My kid is afraid to swim. What ever happened to just learning something? Or doing something recreationally? Why does everyone have to compete, fresh out of the womb?

This. What ever happened to the joy of doing something (swimming, playing ball, etc.) just because a kid enjoys it?

[Anonymous]

I think you can widen your perspective as to what is a "good" college. I think if you are a parent who went to a highly ranked school (which you probably wouldn't have gotten into today) it can be harder to accept that lots of colleges can lead to a solid career and a happy life but that is the reality. Give yourself some credit that your success was not about you than your specific college.

DH and I both went to regional public universities and have done well. I had to turn down big name schools because of the cost. Now I see that HS classmates who went to those seem to be doing about the same. I also see that my work peers went to a wide range of colleges. My kids will be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To what extent do you think that laid back parents can raise laid back kids in this regard, even when surrounded by pressure-cooker families? DH and I are pretty non-competitive when it comes to work and school. We both have jobs that are intellectually stimulating, we read a lot, have academic and social interests, but couldn't care less if our kids are at the top of their class/make the competitive sports team/ etc. I like to think we can raise kids who don't feel the need to keep up with their peers in some of the ways being discussed here, but they're still young and so I don't know if we're being totally naive.

I’m the OP. It’s part of why I posted it. My DH and I are the same. We have graduate degrees, we instilled a love of reading in our kids, but we aren’t crazy competitive. By not pushing our kids, are we short changing them? My gut tells me my kids will be ok but it’s hard to not buy into the craziness of this area. The book describes how damaging this competition can be to kids. Kids feel like they never measure up even when they are excelling. They feel like they can’t mistakes. It all feels soul crushing. I want my kids to do well but not at the expense of their happiness. Not so I can brag about it on an anonymous forum. I think some parents are starting to question this system when kids with 4.3 and insane amount of ECs are being rejected left and right from colleges. Enough is enough. Kids can succeed in life and still have a childhood.

Competitive (adult) child of laid-back parents, here. I don't know if it's my nature or if I just absorbed it from the GT center air from 5th grade onward, but my parents and I were woefully disconnected on what it took to be successful in this area. By the time my younger siblings were middle school age, they had picked up on it a bit (SAT prep for my brother, a full slate of dance classes for my sister) but I think the takeaway is just to parent the kid(s) you have. If they're gung ho into an activity and you have the time and/or means to support it, do so to the fullest of your ability. Conversely, if they don't have an interest/passion, don't force it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Competitive (adult) child of laid-back parents, here. I don't know if it's my nature or if I just absorbed it from the GT center air from 5th grade onward, but my parents and I were woefully disconnected on what it took to be successful in this area. By the time my younger siblings were middle school age, they had picked up on it a bit (SAT prep for my brother, a full slate of dance classes for my sister) but I think the takeaway is just to parent the kid(s) you have. If they're gung ho into an activity and you have the time and/or means to support it, do so to the fullest of your ability. Conversely, if they don't have an interest/passion, don't force it.

+1 I've been reading the book and it talks about being sure that you are (metaphorically) walking next to or following behind your child in their pursuit of an interest, not ahead of them, pulling them along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you can do real low-key if you truly do not care about getting your kid into a top college (like it would be cool with you but you'd be absolutely cool with something else too) and are just really confident your kid will be just fine. I have not yet reached that stage.

I admit that there is a little parental ego in there, but there is also the realization that it does matter. Good colleges give you a leg up. It's a competitive world out there and at some point, my kids will have to compete. They're not going to have trust funds that set them up for life.

I'd like to not play the game, but I have seen others go ahead of me, and I see that it works for these kids whose parents have pushed them a lot with carefully crafted activities and academics. Parents wouldn't do it if it didn't work. This is the message that colleges are sending.

So like a lot of parents out there, I have taken the middle road, not dropping out of the game, but giving a lot of thought as to when to push, what routes to take and when to say "no, that's insane, I'm not pushing my kid to do that in second grade."

I wish it could be like I was a kid and we really didn't think about college until HS, and it was still fine. I got into a top college. In the end, students today are no smarter, more ready for the world than they were 20 years ago despite all the "accomplishments". But it's hard to push back against societal forces on your own.

I think outside of maybe Wall Street, where you go for undergrad really does not matter. At all. Go look at the college forum. Lots of kids and parents who “played the game” got royally burned this year.

[Anonymous]

There is a college for every type of student. The really intellectual driven competitive students should have a place and so should students with other profiles.

Parents that have more than one child are lucky in the sense that they realize at some point that the kids are who they are...almost from birth. They have different strengths and weaknesses and different paths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To what extent do you think that laid back parents can raise laid back kids in this regard, even when surrounded by pressure-cooker families? DH and I are pretty non-competitive when it comes to work and school. We both have jobs that are intellectually stimulating, we read a lot, have academic and social interests, but couldn't care less if our kids are at the top of their class/make the competitive sports team/ etc. I like to think we can raise kids who don't feel the need to keep up with their peers in some of the ways being discussed here, but they're still young and so I don't know if we're being totally naive.

I’m the OP. It’s part of why I posted it. My DH and I are the same. We have graduate degrees, we instilled a love of reading in our kids, but we aren’t crazy competitive. By not pushing our kids, are we short changing them? My gut tells me my kids will be ok but it’s hard to not buy into the craziness of this area. The book describes how damaging this competition can be to kids. Kids feel like they never measure up even when they are excelling. They feel like they can’t mistakes. It all feels soul crushing. I want my kids to do well but not at the expense of their happiness. Not so I can brag about it on an anonymous forum. I think some parents are starting to question this system when kids with 4.3 and insane amount of ECs are being rejected left and right from colleges. Enough is enough. Kids can succeed in life and still have a childhood.

This is well established psychology at this point. You might enjoy reading Carol Dweck's book Growth Mindset for more.

I also think most of the "best and brightest" crowd are trapped on a hamster wheel of their own creation and they're desperate to hand the hamster wheel down to the next generation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents here excelled as kids and while in college so why is it a surprise to find the best and brightest raising their kids to be the best and brightest.

The author argues that because you don’t need to create this pressure cooker environment to raise the “best and brightest.”

Yeah, as someone raised in the DMV, now raising my kids in a smaller, way more laid back area, the idea that you all are the arbiters of “best and brightest” is laughable to me.

+1

Smug and bright are very different.

This is a high achieving, wealthy area. That is a fact. Please do share your current state and county, and we can compare actual statistics and not just your personal opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents here excelled as kids and while in college so why is it a surprise to find the best and brightest raising their kids to be the best and brightest.

The author argues that because you don’t need to create this pressure cooker environment to raise the “best and brightest.”

Yeah, as someone raised in the DMV, now raising my kids in a smaller, way more laid back area, the idea that you all are the arbiters of “best and brightest” is laughable to me.

+1

Smug and bright are very different.

This is a high achieving, wealthy area. That is a fact. Please do share your current state and county, and we can compare actual statistics and not just your personal opinion.

You are just proving her point PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the reason I send my kids to private school. The dial is turned way, way down from where it was for me (I’m a millennial) while still being excellent quality and having plenty of great college admissions.

Lolol

Your second statement contradicts the first. You’re just as bad as any other deluded Bethesda or McLean public school parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents here excelled as kids and while in college so why is it a surprise to find the best and brightest raising their kids to be the best and brightest.

The author argues that because you don’t need to create this pressure cooker environment to raise the “best and brightest.”

Yeah, as someone raised in the DMV, now raising my kids in a smaller, way more laid back area, the idea that you all are the arbiters of “best and brightest” is laughable to me.

+1

Smug and bright are very different.

This is a high achieving, wealthy area. That is a fact. Please do share your current state and county, and we can compare actual statistics and not just your personal opinion.

There are much wealthier and higher achieving areas though. Going by your logic, you should be worrying about Silicon Valley/Manhattan/Hollywood kids trumping your DC kids who have the boy your fed resources to give them an edge in life.

[Anonymous]

The title is perfect. I usually don't trust the view of who use the word 'thriving' with respect to their kids (especially after the past year). I just don't buy what they're selling.