Where do the B+ - high SAT students go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian kids get to grow up in way better and safer environments than kids of other racial groups. It’s not even close.

Well, better yes. Safer? Not really. A case in point - two homes on the same street. Similar HHI and SES,, each home has a kid, both same age, both going to same school. Parents are equally educated in both cases. One kid is my Asian-American kid the other kid is not Asian-American. My kid is considered privileged because his parents are married whereas the other kids parents divorced a few years back. I get up at 5 am to cook for the day, the other mom orders in food. I clean my own house, the other mom is always sipping wine on her patio while a cleaning lady is cleaning her home. I take my kid for scholastic competitions and the other mom has BBQ and beer in the backyard. My kid does well in school and the other kid could not care less. My kid does not get everything he wants because we are saving for college, the other kid gets all the electronics and smart phone you can think of. My kid wears hand me downs from his cousins, the other kid only wears brand-name stuff. My kid excels in academics and ECs, the other kid is troubled and chooses not to attend classes. The other kid's home has CCTV, Ring, Alarm Service. It is more secure and safe than Fort Knox. So his environment is safer. Maybe he and his family think that their life is also better? Maybe they think that his future is brighter? I don't know. What I do know that it is insulting to call the sacrifices of the parents as a privilege. Everyone can make these sacrifices for their children as no one is stopping them from doing so. No one is also forcing them to have children if they are incapable of raising them. The parents can use their human brain instead of their animal brain and make the simple choice to put their kid first. We are not talking about kids in ghettos who are scrambling to survive.

But sure, it was a grand nefarious plan of Asian parents to create a healthy home life for their children. O, Shoot me, for giving a damn for my child. Sorry for knowing how to cook rice three different ways!!

You sure have a whole host of stereotypes going on about why other kids may not do as well as yours. And most of them seem to suggest it is because you are so amazing compared to other parents (who aren't asian??)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian kids get to grow up in way better and safer environments than kids of other racial groups. It’s not even close.

Well, better yes. Safer? Not really. A case in point - two homes on the same street. Similar HHI and SES,, each home has a kid, both same age, both going to same school. Parents are equally educated in both cases. One kid is my Asian-American kid the other kid is not Asian-American. My kid is considered privileged because his parents are married whereas the other kids parents divorced a few years back. I get up at 5 am to cook for the day, the other mom orders in food. I clean my own house, the other mom is always sipping wine on her patio while a cleaning lady is cleaning her home. I take my kid for scholastic competitions and the other mom has BBQ and beer in the backyard. My kid does well in school and the other kid could not care less. My kid does not get everything he wants because we are saving for college, the other kid gets all the electronics and smart phone you can think of. My kid wears hand me downs from his cousins, the other kid only wears brand-name stuff. My kid excels in academics and ECs, the other kid is troubled and chooses not to attend classes. The other kid's home has CCTV, Ring, Alarm Service. It is more secure and safe than Fort Knox. So his environment is safer. Maybe he and his family think that their life is also better? Maybe they think that his future is brighter? I don't know. What I do know that it is insulting to call the sacrifices of the parents as a privilege. Everyone can make these sacrifices for their children as no one is stopping them from doing so. No one is also forcing them to have children if they are incapable of raising them. The parents can use their human brain instead of their animal brain and make the simple choice to put their kid first. We are not talking about kids in ghettos who are scrambling to survive.

But sure, it was a grand nefarious plan of Asian parents to create a healthy home life for their children. O, Shoot me, for giving a damn for my child. Sorry for knowing how to cook rice three different ways!!

DP: I don't disagree with some of your points, but I question your stereotypical treatment of others and neglect of discussion of the more prevalent systemic factors involved in discrimination and racism. And, also, like it or not, at least one principle guiding policies in the US is to try to give each CHILD an equal opportunity, less dependent on what their parents do. Does this sometimes reward poor parental decisions? Yes. But it does act as a small counter to the idea that your parents' sacrifices/assets/choices/strengths determine your outcome.

But kids have always been at the mercy of whoever they were born to (or raised by). That stroke of fortune is the most determinant factor in their outcome I believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re generally better off with higher grades than SATs. The reverse signals laziness. UVA for example will not take a B+ student with a 1500.

think OP was pretty clear about the intent of her question: what are the options for a B+/high SAT score student? But way to go with the grade shame.

No I think OP was thinking the results of a couple hours’ test would make up for 3 years of Bs. And it won’t.

Weird. There is nothing in OP’s post to suggest what you said. Your post reflects more on you — that you are a jerk.

I disagree. The OP clearly hopes that high SATs make up for low grades. Translation: a couple hours' test makes up for three years of Bs. How else does the question translate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

You sound bitter and envious. How about feeling grateful that you were able to afford a high quality education for your child. He/she ran with that opportunity and had a very good GPA.

Celebrate the child you have, and the opportunities they will earn him/her. It is enough.

Yea, and while you're at it explain how allowing "super scoring" favors public schools. It's up to the college to decide how to treat test scores, not high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian kids get to grow up in way better and safer environments than kids of other racial groups. It’s not even close.

Well, better yes. Safer? Not really. A case in point - two homes on the same street. Similar HHI and SES,, each home has a kid, both same age, both going to same school. Parents are equally educated in both cases. One kid is my Asian-American kid the other kid is not Asian-American. My kid is considered privileged because his parents are married whereas the other kids parents divorced a few years back. I get up at 5 am to cook for the day, the other mom orders in food. I clean my own house, the other mom is always sipping wine on her patio while a cleaning lady is cleaning her home. I take my kid for scholastic competitions and the other mom has BBQ and beer in the backyard. My kid does well in school and the other kid could not care less. My kid does not get everything he wants because we are saving for college, the other kid gets all the electronics and smart phone you can think of. My kid wears hand me downs from his cousins, the other kid only wears brand-name stuff. My kid excels in academics and ECs, the other kid is troubled and chooses not to attend classes. The other kid's home has CCTV, Ring, Alarm Service. It is more secure and safe than Fort Knox. So his environment is safer. Maybe he and his family think that their life is also better? Maybe they think that his future is brighter? I don't know. What I do know that it is insulting to call the sacrifices of the parents as a privilege. Everyone can make these sacrifices for their children as no one is stopping them from doing so. No one is also forcing them to have children if they are incapable of raising them. The parents can use their human brain instead of their animal brain and make the simple choice to put their kid first. We are not talking about kids in ghettos who are scrambling to survive.

But sure, it was a grand nefarious plan of Asian parents to create a healthy home life for their children. O, Shoot me, for giving a damn for my child. Sorry for knowing how to cook rice three different ways!!

DP: I don't disagree with some of your points, but I question your stereotypical treatment of others and neglect of discussion of the more prevalent systemic factors involved in discrimination and racism. And, also, like it or not, at least one principle guiding policies in the US is to try to give each CHILD an equal opportunity, less dependent on what their parents do. Does this sometimes reward poor parental decisions? Yes. But it does act as a small counter to the idea that your parents' sacrifices/assets/choices/strengths determine your outcome.

But kids have always been at the mercy of whoever they were born to (or raised by). That stroke of fortune is the most determinant factor in their outcome I believe.

Which is why we have at least a few policies that try to counter the lifelong impacts of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You’re generally better off with higher grades than SATs. The reverse signals laziness. UVA for example will not take a B+ student with a 1500.

Not if your private school’s College Profile shows that, for example, the average SAT for the class is over 1400 and a B+ average is top 20% of the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re generally better off with higher grades than SATs. The reverse signals laziness. UVA for example will not take a B+ student with a 1500.

Not if your private school’s College Profile shows that, for example, the average SAT for the class is over 1400 and a B+ average is top 20% of the class.

UVA is known for it's focus on high grades. It's not the case everywhere else. Many other selective schools just have a minimum threshold for grade but want higher SATs. Grades are more subjective so it's easier for a state school to know the grading patterns of its state than for a national LAC to know the grading patterns of the whole country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

I notice private school parents have all these myths about public school grading. At least in our FCPS schools, the quarter grades are percentages calculated like anything else, there aren't test re-takes unless you fail and you are then limited to a C on the retake even if you score 100 percent. The retake policy is to prevent kids from failing/dropping out of school, not to help those who are gunning for selective schools. Super-scoring is a word for SATs that is open to all private and public schools at the college that accept it. The weighting policy on APs is transparent, reported on school profiles and colleges rescore according to their preferences. Personally I think private schools started dropping APs when parents noticed their kids weren't getting higher exam scores than public school kids and started questioning the value. I went to private schools, I think they offer a great education, but you're really confused if you think public schools have some big advantage in
college admissions. Of course you're free to stop paying gazillionK a year and send your kid to one.

+1 Proud parent of an MCPS student with a 5 on the AP calc exam. (took all tests once, private school pp)

I’m not the previous private school poster, but grading at private is definitely harder. Dd spent half of high school in MCPS, and half private. In MCPS kids with 89.5 and kids with 99.5 get the same grade on their report cards. That doesn’t happen at private school.

[Anonymous]

Dickinson
Bucknell
Muhlenberg
Lehigh
Franklin & Marshall
Virginia Tech
University of Maryland
Mary Washington
Universitiy of Pittsburgh
Juniata
College of Wooster


Just to name a few

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

I notice private school parents have all these myths about public school grading. At least in our FCPS schools, the quarter grades are percentages calculated like anything else, there aren't test re-takes unless you fail and you are then limited to a C on the retake even if you score 100 percent. The retake policy is to prevent kids from failing/dropping out of school, not to help those who are gunning for selective schools. Super-scoring is a word for SATs that is open to all private and public schools at the college that accept it. The weighting policy on APs is transparent, reported on school profiles and colleges rescore according to their preferences. Personally I think private schools started dropping APs when parents noticed their kids weren't getting higher exam scores than public school kids and started questioning the value. I went to private schools, I think they offer a great education, but you're really confused if you think public schools have some big advantage in
college admissions. Of course you're free to stop paying gazillionK a year and send your kid to one.

+1 Proud parent of an MCPS student with a 5 on the AP calc exam. (took all tests once, private school pp)

I’m not the previous private school poster, but grading at private is definitely harder. Dd spent half of high school in MCPS, and half private. In MCPS kids with 89.5 and kids with 99.5 get the same grade on their report cards. That doesn’t happen at private school.

Not relevant at all. Grades are always evaluated in context, and no matter what school you go to someone with over a 1500 on the SAT who isn’t at or near the top of the class is going to scratch some heads - except maybe at TJ because everybody has over a 1500.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You’re generally better off with higher grades than SATs. The reverse signals laziness. UVA for example will not take a B+ student with a 1500.

The reverse signals learning disabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

Your kid should spend a day in Blair magnet classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

I notice private school parents have all these myths about public school grading. At least in our FCPS schools, the quarter grades are percentages calculated like anything else, there aren't test re-takes unless you fail and you are then limited to a C on the retake even if you score 100 percent. The retake policy is to prevent kids from failing/dropping out of school, not to help those who are gunning for selective schools. Super-scoring is a word for SATs that is open to all private and public schools at the college that accept it. The weighting policy on APs is transparent, reported on school profiles and colleges rescore according to their preferences. Personally I think private schools started dropping APs when parents noticed their kids weren't getting higher exam scores than public school kids and started questioning the value. I went to private schools, I think they offer a great education, but you're really confused if you think public schools have some big advantage in college admissions. Of course you're free to stop paying gazillionK a year and send your kid to one.

^^^ This. It's a convenient story that private school parents like to tell themselves.

[Anonymous]

I think the confusion is because public schools in different areas have different grading policies.
A straight A (every year) student was n my child’s 9th grade class. She started the year getting C’s across the board as she was underprepared coming from MD public.
Parents were totally shocked. Child told me that she had been allowed 3 retakes on any test.
By the end of the year child had pulled it together with help from a tutor.
Some public schools are good and some are not.
It’s as simple as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Following. Kid is at Sidwell. I’d celebrate kid’s 3.8(uw) all day over a 4.54(w) from Moco or any local public except TJ to demonstrate the actual value-add of HS .... but this does not help at all when top schools over-value those 4.54s.

How does Michigan or UCLA not know that so many 4.7s are the product of unlimited test retakes, super scoring in HS, creatively averaged quarter grades to blur achievement gaps, etc?

Your kid should spend a day in Blair magnet classes.

If the kid could get into Blair or TJ or even be the top student at any MCPS HS, why would he have to go to Sidwell?