"Not a Meritocracy"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

Not in every state.

Proof?

[Anonymous]

Parents who got their kids into highly selective K-12 schools are complaining that the selection process for college is not meritocratic. Okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

Not in every state.

Proof?

In Pennsylvania, you can be a high school math teacher straight out of undergrad with a degree in “Math Education,” for example.

https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/career-path/how-to-teacher-in-pa/

Tennessee, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas and California, a master’s degree is not required to be a high school teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

Not in every state.

Proof?

In Pennsylvania, you can be a high school math teacher straight out of undergrad with a degree in “Math Education,” for example.

https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/career-path/how-to-teacher-in-pa/

Tennessee, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas and California, a master’s degree is not required to be a high school teacher.

Looks like they take plenty of Math

https://catalog.drexel.edu/undergraduate/schoolofeducation/teachereducation/math/?_gl=1*krwgc7*_ga*ODEwOTM1MDM0LjE2Nzg4MzEwMTQ.*_ga_6KJ1PNLE19*MTY3ODgzMTAxMy4xLjEuMTY3ODgzMTE2Ni42MC4wLjA.#degreerequirementstext

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Go figure that people can approach the same issue differently than you. You want to bow at the altar of the college board go ahead. Some people don’t and that’s a choice.

Sure. just don't complain when the choice haas consequences that you don't like

+1 rich private school parents complaining about public school grade inflation, public school bowing at the altar of the college board, and then get upset because their larlo's college admission was lackluster.

Go figure.

Not every private school parent is upset. Nor is every public school parent happy. If you use this board as the measuring stick for that you’re naive.

"this is why I choose private" parents are upset.

Is it not unreasonable for private parents to be upset if their kids are being DISADVANTAGED in the application process in a way that is unfair? (Lack of adjustment to GPA for higher rigor, tougher grading)

The colleges are aware of the high schools and how to evaluate the students do there is no disadvantage. Private school kids get into top colleges at a higher rate than public. The disadvantage works the opposite way than you describe.

It just sounds like anecdotally this is not the case anymore esp at larger schools/state U etc.

So you’re disadvantaged, maybe, at 2% of colleges in America. A true tragedy.

Is it also no big deal if blacks are disadvantaged at these colleges? Discuss.

I know you can tell the difference between private school kids who attend by choice and your example. you’re just a race baiter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Go figure that people can approach the same issue differently than you. You want to bow at the altar of the college board go ahead. Some people don’t and that’s a choice.

Sure. just don't complain when the choice haas consequences that you don't like

+1 rich private school parents complaining about public school grade inflation, public school bowing at the altar of the college board, and then get upset because their larlo's college admission was lackluster.

Go figure.

Not every private school parent is upset. Nor is every public school parent happy. If you use this board as the measuring stick for that you’re naive.

"this is why I choose private" parents are upset.

Is it not unreasonable for private parents to be upset if their kids are being DISADVANTAGED in the application process in a way that is unfair? (Lack of adjustment to GPA for higher rigor, tougher grading)

The colleges are aware of the high schools and how to evaluate the students do there is no disadvantage. Private school kids get into top colleges at a higher rate than public. The disadvantage works the opposite way than you describe.

It just sounds like anecdotally this is not the case anymore esp at larger schools/state U etc.

So you’re disadvantaged, maybe, at 2% of colleges in America. A true tragedy.

Is it also no big deal if blacks are disadvantaged at these colleges? Discuss.

I mean, I'm no big fan of affirmative action or racial preferences of any kind. But, comparing the historical discrimination faced by African-Americans in college admissions versus the slightly lower level of advantage currently happening to rich private schoolers is a little tone deaf.

A little?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

exactly.. and often times, STEM HS teachers have a masters because they get paid more.

As for ES teachers, they don't need to have majored in a particular subject like math because most ES teach a variety of subjects, and at this level, knowing how to teach to a variety of learning abilities in young kids is more important than knowing how to do Calculus. Like I said, I'm good at math, but teaching simple division to an ES child is challenging if you don't know how to teach a young child. That is what ES teachers should be better at than math majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The flippant comments of the HOS are all the more infuriating when the fact is that most of the Big3 parents I know are not wringing their hands because their kid isn't getting into Harvard or Duke or Stanford. They are worried because their child, who has good grades, test scores, ECs, recs, etc., and who is busted their butt in school for the last four years, is getting deferred from Wisconsin, Tufts, Emory and Georgia. These are all good schools and 2-3 years ago, a strong (but not superstar) student at a Big 3 would have been an auto admit. But now these kids are being deferred. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks, but many families are really questioning whether the slog of a Big 3 high school is worth it.

Tufts had a 9% acceptance rate last year and Emory had an 11%. Both schools have had acceptance rates lower than 20% for the last 8 years. Their test score have always been high as well, and Emory is a top 20ish school. What are you talking about and why are you comparing them to Wisconsin and UGA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flippant comments of the HOS are all the more infuriating when the fact is that most of the Big3 parents I know are not wringing their hands because their kid isn't getting into Harvard or Duke or Stanford. They are worried because their child, who has good grades, test scores, ECs, recs, etc., and who is busted their butt in school for the last four years, is getting deferred from Wisconsin, Tufts, Emory and Georgia. These are all good schools and 2-3 years ago, a strong (but not superstar) student at a Big 3 would have been an auto admit. But now these kids are being deferred. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks, but many families are really questioning whether the slog of a Big 3 high school is worth it.

Tufts acceptance rate is 13% and Emory is 14%. Why would anyone be an auto-admit?

Ok, "auto admit" was a poor choice of words and is obviously rankling some people. My point was just that good, but not tippy top, schools that strong Big 3 students were accepted at regularly a few years ago are now seeing many, many deferrals. These threads always imply that Big 3 parents have their panties in a bunch because their special snowflake is not getting into Yale. That is absolutely not what's happening, by and large. Most Big 3 parents send their kids to these schools because they believe in the education. But is it hard to see your kid work herself to the bone for four years and get deferred from Wisconsin when her neighbor down the street -- an equally smart, engaging and accomplished kid -- who did minimal work at Wilson gets in.

By the way, my kids are in early HS and MS, so I'm just sharing experiences of friends and am looking ahead for my own kids.

You're gross.

Different poster here who has had high schoolers at both a Big3 and JR (formally Wilson). The Big3 requires at least 4 times the work that my other kids did at Wilson. It's night and day.
I have a 4th kid and we're not sure what we're going to do with this kid as I think the sweat spot is somewhere between the two options we've tried so far.

The comparison between “the Big 3” and a large public school is meaningless…that’s great that your kid at the fancy private had way more work but so what? Most kids at Wilson don’t have families that can shell out $50k/year …should colleges just shun the public school kids?

Also, after 9th grade, Wilson kids get plenty of work if they choose rigorous courses. My kids easily had 2-3 hours per night…I’m sure less than top privates, but not a quarter as much.

We are not shelling out $50K for private--my kid gets aid.

Oh! Wait a minute. You got financial aid to attend, and you’re pissed that your kid did not get into the most elite schools. Yeah, it doesn’t work that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

One semester with 2 quizzes worth 20 points.
Another semester with 3 quizzes each worth 20 points

But you want them want each semester to be weighed equally...

Give me a break. Then give equal amount of work for each semester since (kicker) they are for the same length of time.

You too can scroll through several years of ParentVue data like I am. It isn't always an equal amount of work. And that isn't really the issue. Succinctly - there is no slam dunk argument there. We can can all see that there is grade inflation on a macro scale. GPAs across the board are too high. It may be time to start using scales again. If everyone scores over 90% then maybe 90% is not an "A"

If more and more students are scoring 90+ than ever before then it could be argued that our schools (plus all the YouTube tutors) are doing a better job of teaching? That would be a win win for our communities since we are getting better prepared young people.

But if you have an emotional need to feel like you are somehow better than the family next door then I suppose that would bother you a lot

We are not “doing better” when you compare historical results and international results We have just dumbed. down the metrics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flippant comments of the HOS are all the more infuriating when the fact is that most of the Big3 parents I know are not wringing their hands because their kid isn't getting into Harvard or Duke or Stanford. They are worried because their child, who has good grades, test scores, ECs, recs, etc., and who is busted their butt in school for the last four years, is getting deferred from Wisconsin, Tufts, Emory and Georgia. These are all good schools and 2-3 years ago, a strong (but not superstar) student at a Big 3 would have been an auto admit. But now these kids are being deferred. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks, but many families are really questioning whether the slog of a Big 3 high school is worth it.

Tufts had a 9% acceptance rate last year and Emory had an 11%. Both schools have had acceptance rates lower than 20% for the last 8 years. Their test score have always been high as well, and Emory is a top 20ish school. What are you talking about and why are you comparing them to Wisconsin and UGA?

The bigger issue is that schools like Tulane are taking nearly everyone ED. I believe for the 2022 HS class, 99% were admitted ED. I have heard that this year it is now like 87%. No idea what Emory's stats may be. I bet their stats looked significantly different 3+ years ago.

As a result, the ED acceptance rates are fairly high...40%+. Certain schools just decided to stop playing the yield game by filling the vast majority of their class ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flippant comments of the HOS are all the more infuriating when the fact is that most of the Big3 parents I know are not wringing their hands because their kid isn't getting into Harvard or Duke or Stanford. They are worried because their child, who has good grades, test scores, ECs, recs, etc., and who is busted their butt in school for the last four years, is getting deferred from Wisconsin, Tufts, Emory and Georgia. These are all good schools and 2-3 years ago, a strong (but not superstar) student at a Big 3 would have been an auto admit. But now these kids are being deferred. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks, but many families are really questioning whether the slog of a Big 3 high school is worth it.

Tufts had a 9% acceptance rate last year and Emory had an 11%. Both schools have had acceptance rates lower than 20% for the last 8 years. Their test score have always been high as well, and Emory is a top 20ish school. What are you talking about and why are you comparing them to Wisconsin and UGA?

The bigger issue is that schools like Tulane are taking nearly everyone ED[b]. I believe for the 2022 HS class, 99% were admitted ED. I have heard that this year it is now like 87%. No idea what Emory's stats may be. I bet their stats looked significantly different 3+ years ago.

As a result, the ED acceptance rates are fairly high...40%+. Certain schools just decided to stop playing the yield game by filling the vast majority of their class ED.

The reigned that in this year - deferred in ED/EA to push more into RD. (still a large number though)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

Not in every state.

Proof?

In Pennsylvania, you can be a high school math teacher straight out of undergrad with a degree in “Math Education,” for example.

https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/career-path/how-to-teacher-in-pa/

Tennessee, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas and California, a master’s degree is not required to be a high school teacher.

As a math major I took one upper division class dual listed as math education. It's a completely different world, they are not math majors or subject matter experts in the least. It was graduate credit for the math-education majors, and most were already teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. Everyone is disappointed when their hard working student does not get into a desired college. That is true across the board.

Yes, but private school parents seem to be blaming the private school, as if paying for the $$ private school should mean they should get special treatment.

I have no dog in this fight but it seems the position of the private schools is that their kids with lower GPAs are being evaluated more harshly. Like the appropriate adjustments are not being made for the rigor of the grading.

This. My kid has been in public and private. Public school was not rigorous (even though it’s one of the “top area public schools). My kid’s gpa would be much higher in public. Maybe colleges were never really distinguishing between the rigor of schools or mandatory SATs disguised this.

The public school applicants have AP scores to validate their grades. If we're talking about public school kids applying to the type of schools the OP think he kid deserves to attend, you are talking about a lot of 4s and 5s in classes with curriculums that are supposed to be consistent across all schools offering the course.

Is it MCPS where you get an 82 one semester and a 92 the next and they end up with an A for the year? That’s the crazy grade inflation I’m talking about.

Indeed, but as a PP stated, just look at their AP test scores.

Everyone games the system to their advantage. Kids will put in the minimal effort to get the A, but when it counts like the AP test scores, they will show their ability.

Lots of public school kids get majority 5s on APs and 1500+ SAT scores. No amount of grade inflation is going to help with the AP test scores.

I don’t care about AP scores. The colleges are screening by GPAs which are artificially inflated.

AP scores validate or discredit a GPA. They are the one objective measure of course rigor that colleges have. Schools can talk about how rigorous their classes are until they are blue in the face, but a kid with and A and a 5 in a similarly titled class from a no name public school is going to be viewed as having done well in a rigorous class.

There are many schools that don't do AP for many unique and valid reasons.

What valid reasons do private schools use to get rid of AP classes?

They think they can create better classes.

Yet, based on the grade inflation argument, AP exams (and classes) are really the only objective measurement of ability. Basically, private schools are getting rid of AP classes because they don't want to pay College Board. IMO, it's a financial reason. Their teachers aren't even certified teachers.

When I see job postings, I always see how the employers want certifications in abc, xyz, but I guess for private K-12, certifications need not be required. I guess it's because they don't get paid as much. Private school parents are happy to spend $$ on schools being taught by teachers who don't get paid that much and aren't certified. Then, those same parents expect high results for college admissions.

Go figure.

Lots of Towson-educated “education” majors teaching in our local public schools. The vast majority of them wouldn’t have survived or gotten into a top college or a difficult subject-matter major.

Sure, but the little kid who was educated by the Towson education major could grow up to go into a public magnet program and do exceedingly well in college.

Whereas, a private school kid whose parents spent a ton of money on K-12, and taught by a liberal arts major at some SLAC could end up at UI or Michigan State.

YMMV.

???

What's the ??? about? What major or college the teacher went to, especially in the lower grades, does not really impact what college a kid who was taught by such a teacher ends up at, nor does it indicate what their SAT scores are. So, what does it matter if a private school teacher went to a fancy school or that a public school teacher went to to Towson? At least the public school teacher is certified. Don't you look for certifications when you hire someone? Why wouldn't you want your expensive private school teacher to be certified? Seems weird.

Thanks for clarifying - I didn't understand the point.

Personally, I'm more interested if the teacher's major is in the subject they are teaching and if they continue to take CEUs, especially in the sciences.

I've flipped on this now that I have kids. Having a major gives you a great deal of knowledge about a subject 99% of which is irrelevant to a given high school course let alone elementary school. I'd rather a teacher who understands the subject matter enough to teach it and has actually learned to teach. FWIW the worst teacher that I ever had was a chemistry PhD in his first year of teaching. He had no clue how to deal with a classroom let alone impart knowledge

First, chemistry is considered the most difficult subject to teach and I have never really met anyone who is successful at it. They either hold their PhDs, but cannot convey the material. Or have teaching skills, but lack any real mastery of the subject.

Second, most teachers I know who have a major in the subject also take graduate ed classes along the way and pick up the teaching skils.

But education majors take classes IN teaching, and also continue to get trained.

I am not saying that all public education teachers are all great. My kids have had some lackluster ones for sure. But, a PP's comment that some Towson education grad would make for a lackluster teacher is wrong. They can be good teachers even if they are not smart enough to go to an Ivy.

It's much, much easier to obtain a masters in teaching/education than it is to get a PhD in Chemistry (or, frankly, even a BS in Chemistry). So, smart schools hire teachers with subject mastery and teach them how to teach, best practices, assign an experienced mentor, etc. What's extremely difficult is getting someone who has a BA in Education to then try to earn a degree in Chemistry to acquire enough understanding of the subject matter to teach it at a high level. Not going to happen.

Public HS teachers major in the subject they teach, not education. They then take an education minor or pursue a MEd for licensure. Elementary teachers major in education.

Not in every state.

Proof?

In Pennsylvania, you can be a high school math teacher straight out of undergrad with a degree in “Math Education,” for example.

https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/career-path/how-to-teacher-in-pa/

Tennessee, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arizona, Oklahoma, Texas and California, a master’s degree is not required to be a high school teacher.

As a math major I took one upper division class dual listed as math education. It's a completely different world, they are not math majors or subject matter experts in the least. It was graduate credit for the math-education majors, and most were already teaching.

That was my point.

Whereas private school math teachers tend to have been math majors in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The flippant comments of the HOS are all the more infuriating when the fact is that most of the Big3 parents I know are not wringing their hands because their kid isn't getting into Harvard or Duke or Stanford. They are worried because their child, who has good grades, test scores, ECs, recs, etc., and who is busted their butt in school for the last four years, is getting deferred from Wisconsin, Tufts, Emory and Georgia. These are all good schools and 2-3 years ago, a strong (but not superstar) student at a Big 3 would have been an auto admit. But now these kids are being deferred. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks, but many families are really questioning whether the slog of a Big 3 high school is worth it.

Tufts acceptance rate is 13% and Emory is 14%. Why would anyone be an auto-admit?

Ok, "auto admit" was a poor choice of words and is obviously rankling some people. My point was just that good, but not tippy top, schools that strong Big 3 students were accepted at regularly a few years ago are now seeing many, many deferrals. These threads always imply that Big 3 parents have their panties in a bunch because their special snowflake is not getting into Yale. That is absolutely not what's happening, by and large. Most Big 3 parents send their kids to these schools because they believe in the education. But is it hard to see your kid work herself to the bone for four years and get deferred from Wisconsin when her neighbor down the street -- an equally smart, engaging and accomplished kid -- who did minimal work at Wilson gets in.

By the way, my kids are in early HS and MS, so I'm just sharing experiences of friends and am looking ahead for my own kids.

You're gross.

Different poster here who has had high schoolers at both a Big3 and JR (formally Wilson). The Big3 requires at least 4 times the work that my other kids did at Wilson. It's night and day.
I have a 4th kid and we're not sure what we're going to do with this kid as I think the sweat spot is somewhere between the two options we've tried so far.

The comparison between “the Big 3” and a large public school is meaningless…that’s great that your kid at the fancy private had way more work but so what? Most kids at Wilson don’t have families that can shell out $50k/year …should colleges just shun the public school kids?

Also, after 9th grade, Wilson kids get plenty of work if they choose rigorous courses. My kids easily had 2-3 hours per night…I’m sure less than top privates, but not a quarter as much.

We are not shelling out $50K for private--my kid gets aid.

Oh! Wait a minute. You got financial aid to attend, and you’re pissed that your kid did not get into the most elite schools. Yeah, it doesn’t work that way.

Or the ^PP could just go to public with the masses and not need aide.