Colleges for the slow-to-mature kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are tons of great schools for this type of kid. Check out Colleges that Change Lives.

Any college can change your God damn life.

Where's all that animosity coming from?

Different poster here but that book is overrated and over sold to anxious parents - it might just be about the book.

Loren Pope, the former ed editor for the NYT, is overrated?

I don’t rate her, but this particular book is.

LOL - Loren Pope, now deceased, was male. So much for your knowledge of this particular book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about kids who didn't do well in 9th and 10th grades academically but got their acts together in 11th/12th? Say they end up with a weighted GPA in the 3.7-4.0 range but end up with a 1550+ in the SATs in junior/senior year. Basically, a good trajectory. Assuming these are male, White or Asian kids that want to do Engineering/CS with no legacy/hooks/sports. Are they pretty much fuc*ed? Will any "top school" touch them?

Would like to hear about schools that really look into the application and select such kids as well as personal experiences. Not interested in "you can get a great education at any school" posts, please.

Niece (ok, not a male) faced a somewhat similar situation when applying last year. Had erratic grades for 9th and 10th grades, then got her act together and got closer to 3.9-4.0 for 11th and 12th (in a competitive suburban Cali public school), which boosted her cumulative GPA up to 3.4 or so. Took SATs once and got 1280. No legacy/hooks/sports/URM. Knew she wanted a large school (for environmental studies/poli sci), and ideally one that would reflect her 11th and 12th grade performance rather than the years before that, so she focused on (stronger) state flagships with a relatively high admit rate, and applied regular rather than ED to show the pattern of improvement continued through senior fall. She got into Indiana, Colorado, Arizona (and one of those odd 2+2 acceptances from Penn State); rejected from Wisconsin. Chose Indiana. Is ecstatic there, thrilled by the breadth of course offerings (and students) and faculty engagement, is making Dean's List. (Interestingly, her best friends there aren't fellow OOS students but smart hardworking Indianans who are at IU for financial reasons.) The icing on the cake is that we've now learned (confirmation bias at work...) that Indiana -- which her parents really didn't know much about until now - is actually higher ranked on those "global university/reputation" surveys than the Ivy and NESCAC schools her parents went to, so they've happily passed the bragging rights crown to her.

This has made us all big fans of the state flagships, especially in cases like this where the application package is going to have some weakness to overcome. It seems at virtually every level, the large state flagships accept a greater share of applicants than academically-comparable SLACs and private universities (and the stats you cite might enable your candidate to aim for more selective flagships like Michigan and Illinois and Washington, and for engineering maybe Purdue or Michigan State). I'm not sure my niece's admission was because of "personal attention" to her application (as you wonder above) or simply because they'll accept applicants who seem relatively qualified and can pay full fare (and assume they'll just drop out if they can't cut it) - but it worked for my niece. Of course, if by "top school" you secretly mean Ivy or "T20" then maybe this experience doesn't help you much, but realistically there are lot of state flagships in the top 50 or 75 or to 100 US schools, and a student emerging from those with a strong record isn't disadvantaged, either in terms of education or postgraduate prospects. The outdated notion that the quality of the education available at a particular school is inversely correlated to that school's acceptance rate is silly, especially since there's so much good info out there nowadays (eg WSJ not USNWR) that disproves it.

OP. Thanks for the detailed post and the anecdote. I get the "there's a school for everyone" message..supply and demand, etc. We would want DC to go to the best school possible for his profile but was wondering why a handicap is not available to such late-bloomer kids at top schools (regardless of how you define them) while it is available to perfectly normal kids just because of their color, race, gender, etc.

YIKES! Well there it is. You think your white "late bloomer" deserves to have preference over "those people." Really, this is just gross.

Fu*k off! What are you? The thought police? OP was asking a valid question that should be addressed by schools. Do you think an ADHD white kid does not carry the same level of disadvantage as a black or latino kid with zero issues?

Gross

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are tons of great schools for this type of kid. Check out Colleges that Change Lives.

Any college can change your God damn life.

Where's all that animosity coming from?

Different poster here but that book is overrated and over sold to anxious parents - it might just be about the book.

Loren Pope, the former ed editor for the NYT, is overrated?

I don’t rate her, but this particular book is.

LOL - Loren Pope, now deceased, was male. So much for your knowledge of this particular book.

You’re right. I didn’t read the whole book and my kid tossed it aside. My aunt, a former director of admissions at a university thought it was junk marketed toward anxious parents. You asked why that person might have strong feelings about it and I suggested a reason. How old are you? You sound like a teen troll.

[Anonymous]

This describes my ds...but how do you indicate or define "late bloomer" on an application? The fact is that a very large % of boys have ADHD with undeveloped prefrontal cortex. Add to that the slower development of boys as a rule, and you have a gender with a large disadvantage. I'm not saying ADHD doesn't affect girls, but it's much more prevalent in boys. Along with ADHD typically comes the co-morbidities of anxiety or depression. During the isolation of online school, anxiety in my DS skyrocketed into a serious disorder (although thanks to more lenient grading, this wasn't an issue for his GPA). Despite these silent disabilities he has managed to do quite well with GPA and got high SATs without prepping, although not well enough for some school's GPA standards. You just don't know what kids go through, but I'd venture to say he's not alone. Call it "late blooming" or whatever you want. The data for ADHD kids is that at least 30% flunk out of their first semester (per his therapist--who almost flunked out of undergrad but went on to get a PhD). Also the abnormal pressure on kids these days (especially in this area) only worsens the anxiety. The good news is that with time (and hopefully some therapy) these kids eventually mature and can go on to some great things. Their brains and emotional state might not yet be ready for the highest degree of rigor, unaided by a hovering parent or tutor (although my ds hasn't had any tutoring or parental involvement with school). This is what I've learned...and it gives me some comfort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of posters complain about how their kids are "bad at taking tests" and therefore have a low SAT/ACT score but decent GPA. Colleges are now allowing test optional applications to address this (thanks to Corona mostly). Great for those parents/kids!

What about kids who didn't do well in 9th and 10th grades academically but got their acts together in 11th/12th? Say they end up with a weighted GPA in the 3.7-4.0 range but end up with a 1550+ in the SATs in junior/senior year. Basically, a good trajectory. Assuming these are male, White or Asian kids that want to do Engineering/CS with no legacy/hooks/sports. Are they pretty much fuc*ed? Will any "top school" touch them?

Would like to hear about schools that really look into the application and select such kids as well as personal experiences. Not interested in "you can get a great education at any school" posts, please.

I totally agree, there are so many families that are MC/college educated parents but either do not follow the current cultural trend of helicoptering or there are issues in the family-like medical or mental illness, substance use, cheating and so on where the parents are not helicoptering and very smart kids who also do not follow the trend of competitiveness can totally slack off and go through school, with Cs and Bs and when they finally figure out at 16 they want to do well in school their time has passed...its really sad our kids are the generation of no second chances...zoning out in grade 9 or 10 , wrong text message sent can basically define your life for a long time.....

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This describes my ds...but how do you indicate or define "late bloomer" on an application? The fact is that a very large % of boys have ADHD with undeveloped prefrontal cortex. Add to that the slower development of boys as a rule, and you have a gender with a large disadvantage. I'm not saying ADHD doesn't affect girls, but it's much more prevalent in boys. Along with ADHD typically comes the co-morbidities of anxiety or depression. During the isolation of online school, anxiety in my DS skyrocketed into a serious disorder (although thanks to more lenient grading, this wasn't an issue for his GPA). Despite these silent disabilities he has managed to do quite well with GPA and got high SATs without prepping, although not well enough for some school's GPA standards. You just don't know what kids go through, but I'd venture to say he's not alone. Call it "late blooming" or whatever you want. The data for ADHD kids is that at least 30% flunk out of their first semester (per his therapist--who almost flunked out of undergrad but went on to get a PhD). Also the abnormal pressure on kids these days (especially in this area) only worsens the anxiety. The good news is that with time (and hopefully some therapy) these kids eventually mature and can go on to some great things. Their brains and emotional state might not yet be ready for the highest degree of rigor, unaided by a hovering parent or tutor (although my ds hasn't had any tutoring or parental involvement with school). This is what I've learned...and it gives me some comfort.

It’s just more often diagnosed in boys. Girls suffer just as much but we don’t exhibit the hyperactivity as often so they are untreated longer and diagnosed later. Treated people do not flunk out at higher rates.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

Wait. Are you seriously arguing that the Chinese/Indian/Russian systems are MORE meritocratic? The same India that has somehow managed to export caste prejudices to US universities, to the point that US colleges have needed to institute policies to prevent targeted harassment of "lower caste" Indian students? That India?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/1/us-csu-dalits-hail-university-caste-discrimination-ban

Or perhaps you mean the Gaokao, which students start studying for in elementary school? The one with 5,000 university slots for 9 million test takers? Yes, they have plenty of time to prep, but it does "late bloomers" no good to begin prepping at 14 for a test the most privileged Chinese have been preparing for since 8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

Wait. Are you seriously arguing that the Chinese/Indian/Russian systems are MORE meritocratic? The same India that has somehow managed to export caste prejudices to US universities, to the point that US colleges have needed to institute policies to prevent targeted harassment of "lower caste" Indian students? That India?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/1/us-csu-dalits-hail-university-caste-discrimination-ban

Or perhaps you mean the Gaokao, which students start studying for in elementary school? The one with 5,000 university slots for 9 million test takers? Yes, they have plenty of time to prep, but it does "late bloomers" no good to begin prepping at 14 for a test the most privileged Chinese have been preparing for since 8.

Find me another valid source (other than lefty, anti-US news sources) and a "normal" school system other than California where "caste" is a protected class. This is people making crap out of nothing.

At least the Chinese start at 8. Parents start their kids off at football and soccer at 3 or 4 in the US and subject them to hours of training and torture throughout their school lives. Most of them don't "make it", do they? No different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

Wait. Are you seriously arguing that the Chinese/Indian/Russian systems are MORE meritocratic? The same India that has somehow managed to export caste prejudices to US universities, to the point that US colleges have needed to institute policies to prevent targeted harassment of "lower caste" Indian students? That India?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/1/us-csu-dalits-hail-university-caste-discrimination-ban

Or perhaps you mean the Gaokao, which students start studying for in elementary school? The one with 5,000 university slots for 9 million test takers? Yes, they have plenty of time to prep, but it does "late bloomers" no good to begin prepping at 14 for a test the most privileged Chinese have been preparing for since 8.

Find me another valid source (other than lefty, anti-US news sources) and a "normal" school system other than California where "caste" is a protected class. This is people making crap out of nothing.

At least the Chinese start at 8. Parents start their kids off at football and soccer at 3 or 4 in the US and subject them to hours of training and torture throughout their school lives. Most of them don't "make it", do they? No different.

The literal entire point of this thread is "late bloomers" who don't get serious about school until 15 or 16. A system built around kids having their act together at 8 is actually substantially worse.

The football analogy doesn't work because football is not the only way to access university and therefore a white collar profession. The Gaokao is.

As for the other thing, Harvard recognized caste as a protected class as of the end of last year. https://qz.com/india/2099391/harvard-university-recognises-caste-as-a-protected-class/

"Harvard is the first Ivy League school to spotlight the discrimination students from oppressed and marginalised castes face on campus. It now joins a handful of American institutions such as the University of California, Davis, Colby College, and Brandeis University in formally accepting the prevalence of caste-based harassment on campuses."

and

"From derogatory comments about the intellect of oppressed caste students, to proudly narrating their activism against affirmative action in India prior to their admission into Harvard, to a complete cultural monopoly of south Asian/India celebrations the deep sense of alienation, humiliation, and social exclusion I experienced made me constantly vigilant and worried about the consequences of being outed as a Dalit in Harvard’s south Asian circles,” Raj Muthu, an alumnus of Harvard, told Equality Labs."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This describes my ds...but how do you indicate or define "late bloomer" on an application? The fact is that a very large % of boys have ADHD with undeveloped prefrontal cortex. Add to that the slower development of boys as a rule, and you have a gender with a large disadvantage. I'm not saying ADHD doesn't affect girls, but it's much more prevalent in boys. Along with ADHD typically comes the co-morbidities of anxiety or depression. During the isolation of online school, anxiety in my DS skyrocketed into a serious disorder (although thanks to more lenient grading, this wasn't an issue for his GPA). Despite these silent disabilities he has managed to do quite well with GPA and got high SATs without prepping, although not well enough for some school's GPA standards. You just don't know what kids go through, but I'd venture to say he's not alone. Call it "late blooming" or whatever you want. The data for ADHD kids is that at least 30% flunk out of their first semester (per his therapist--who almost flunked out of undergrad but went on to get a PhD). Also the abnormal pressure on kids these days (especially in this area) only worsens the anxiety. The good news is that with time (and hopefully some therapy) these kids eventually mature and can go on to some great things. Their brains and emotional state might not yet be ready for the highest degree of rigor, unaided by a hovering parent or tutor (although my ds hasn't had any tutoring or parental involvement with school). This is what I've learned...and it gives me some comfort.

It’s just more often diagnosed in boys. Girls suffer just as much but we don’t exhibit the hyperactivity as often so they are untreated longer and diagnosed later. Treated people do not flunk out at higher rates.

I stand corrected--girls are definitely under diagnosed and certainly suffer as much. My son has been "treated" with med since 7 but treatment isn't always as easy as it sounds. A pill to help him focus also exacerbates his anxiety. Also the pill only lasts so long during the day. Anxiety is a far tougher issue to resolve., and anxiety and ADHD feed on one another. I'm just trying to say it's not as easy as it sounds. I shouldn't have made the gender distinction. Boys brains develop more slowly than girls, but ADHD brains develop more slowly still.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This describes my ds...but how do you indicate or define "late bloomer" on an application? The fact is that a very large % of boys have ADHD with undeveloped prefrontal cortex. Add to that the slower development of boys as a rule, and you have a gender with a large disadvantage. I'm not saying ADHD doesn't affect girls, but it's much more prevalent in boys. Along with ADHD typically comes the co-morbidities of anxiety or depression. During the isolation of online school, anxiety in my DS skyrocketed into a serious disorder (although thanks to more lenient grading, this wasn't an issue for his GPA). Despite these silent disabilities he has managed to do quite well with GPA and got high SATs without prepping, although not well enough for some school's GPA standards. You just don't know what kids go through, but I'd venture to say he's not alone. Call it "late blooming" or whatever you want. The data for ADHD kids is that at least 30% flunk out of their first semester (per his therapist--who almost flunked out of undergrad but went on to get a PhD). Also the abnormal pressure on kids these days (especially in this area) only worsens the anxiety. The good news is that with time (and hopefully some therapy) these kids eventually mature and can go on to some great things. Their brains and emotional state might not yet be ready for the highest degree of rigor, unaided by a hovering parent or tutor (although my ds hasn't had any tutoring or parental involvement with school). This is what I've learned...and it gives me some comfort.

It’s just more often diagnosed in boys. Girls suffer just as much but we don’t exhibit the hyperactivity as often so they are untreated longer and diagnosed later. Treated people do not flunk out at higher rates.

I stand corrected--girls are definitely under diagnosed and certainly suffer as much. My son has been "treated" with med since 7 but treatment isn't always as easy as it sounds. A pill to help him focus also exacerbates his anxiety. Also the pill only lasts so long during the day. Anxiety is a far tougher issue to resolve., and anxiety and ADHD feed on one another. I'm just trying to say it's not as easy as it sounds. I shouldn't have made the gender distinction. Boys brains develop more slowly than girls, but ADHD brains develop more slowly still.

Well, it's more varied than that. Boys brains on average develop slightly more slowly but develop quite fast at and after puberty. Also, little evidence for meaningful gender differences in executive functioning: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6235899/#:~:text=Our%20overall%20conclusion%20is%20that,function%20are%20not%20overwhelming%20(Fig.

This is not about ADHD, just gender differences overall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:community colleges

I used to think this but now think a decent state college is better. CC and living at home can’t compare to the 4 yr experience, with dorms, clubs, etc. College is more than just academics. It’s where kids find themselves. I’m not saying to go into debt to have a fun time, but if you can swing it, find a decent affordable state school (or satellite) that will let your kid have the experience and grow.

Agree. Community college outcomes are terrible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of posters complain about how their kids are "bad at taking tests" and therefore have a low SAT/ACT score but decent GPA. Colleges are now allowing test optional applications to address this (thanks to Corona mostly). Great for those parents/kids!

What about kids who didn't do well in 9th and 10th grades academically but got their acts together in 11th/12th? Say they end up with a weighted GPA in the 3.7-4.0 range but end up with a 1550+ in the SATs in junior/senior year. Basically, a good trajectory. Assuming these are male, White or Asian kids that want to do Engineering/CS with no legacy/hooks/sports. Are they pretty much fuc*ed? Will any "top school" touch them?

Would like to hear about schools that really look into the application and select such kids as well as personal experiences. Not interested in "you can get a great education at any school" posts, please.

I totally agree, there are so many families that are MC/college educated parents but either do not follow the current cultural trend of helicoptering or there are issues in the family-like medical or mental illness, substance use, cheating and so on where the parents are not helicoptering and very smart kids who also do not follow the trend of competitiveness can totally slack off and go through school, with Cs and Bs and when they finally figure out at 16 they want to do well in school their time has passed...its really sad our kids are the generation of no second chances...zoning out in grade 9 or 10 , wrong text message sent can basically define your life for a long time.....

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

There is rampant cheating on the exams in India and China. This is well known but as it favors people already in power, is largely ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of posters complain about how their kids are "bad at taking tests" and therefore have a low SAT/ACT score but decent GPA. Colleges are now allowing test optional applications to address this (thanks to Corona mostly). Great for those parents/kids!

What about kids who didn't do well in 9th and 10th grades academically but got their acts together in 11th/12th? Say they end up with a weighted GPA in the 3.7-4.0 range but end up with a 1550+ in the SATs in junior/senior year. Basically, a good trajectory. Assuming these are male, White or Asian kids that want to do Engineering/CS with no legacy/hooks/sports. Are they pretty much fuc*ed? Will any "top school" touch them?

Would like to hear about schools that really look into the application and select such kids as well as personal experiences. Not interested in "you can get a great education at any school" posts, please.

I totally agree, there are so many families that are MC/college educated parents but either do not follow the current cultural trend of helicoptering or there are issues in the family-like medical or mental illness, substance use, cheating and so on where the parents are not helicoptering and very smart kids who also do not follow the trend of competitiveness can totally slack off and go through school, with Cs and Bs and when they finally figure out at 16 they want to do well in school their time has passed...its really sad our kids are the generation of no second chances...zoning out in grade 9 or 10 , wrong text message sent can basically define your life for a long time.....

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

There is rampant cheating on the exams in India and China. This is well known but as it favors people already in power, is largely ignored.

There's cheating everywhere. Don't kid yourself that there isn't. However, there is close to zero cheating in the entrance exams. They are timed and it would be very difficult to cheat on them even if you were working on them from home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I see a lot of crap on this forum about how American education is "superior", "holistic" admissions is best, yada, yada and talking down on Chinese and Indian systems where all that matters (for the most part) is one entrance exam. This exam is taken by students in grade 12 and you have enough notice and time to prep, etc. Unlike in the US if you don't do well in ALL 4 years of High school you are screwed. Why is that not a better system? Why not have customized exams for each area of study and have the kids compete after 12th grade. Make sure all the money and time people spend on made-up ECs and nonsense participation trophies on travel sports goes towards funding prep for under-privileged kids? Wouldn't that level the playing field? No issues with "slow to mature" or "under priviliged" or "URM". All would have the same level of prep available to them. Of course, colleges can't hide behind the "holistic" veil and do what they want will not like this and the college prep industry that reads the tea leaves on behalf of parents will be out of business.

Wait. Are you seriously arguing that the Chinese/Indian/Russian systems are MORE meritocratic? The same India that has somehow managed to export caste prejudices to US universities, to the point that US colleges have needed to institute policies to prevent targeted harassment of "lower caste" Indian students? That India?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/1/us-csu-dalits-hail-university-caste-discrimination-ban

Or perhaps you mean the Gaokao, which students start studying for in elementary school? The one with 5,000 university slots for 9 million test takers? Yes, they have plenty of time to prep, but it does "late bloomers" no good to begin prepping at 14 for a test the most privileged Chinese have been preparing for since 8.

Find me another valid source (other than lefty, anti-US news sources) and a "normal" school system other than California where "caste" is a protected class. This is people making crap out of nothing.

At least the Chinese start at 8. Parents start their kids off at football and soccer at 3 or 4 in the US and subject them to hours of training and torture throughout their school lives. Most of them don't "make it", do they? No different.

The literal entire point of this thread is "late bloomers" who don't get serious about school until 15 or 16. A system built around kids having their act together at 8 is actually substantially worse.

The football analogy doesn't work because football is not the only way to access university and therefore a white collar profession. The Gaokao is.

As for the other thing, Harvard recognized caste as a protected class as of the end of last year. https://qz.com/india/2099391/harvard-university-recognises-caste-as-a-protected-class/

"Harvard is the first Ivy League school to spotlight the discrimination students from oppressed and marginalised castes face on campus. It now joins a handful of American institutions such as the University of California, Davis, Colby College, and Brandeis University in formally accepting the prevalence of caste-based harassment on campuses."

and

"From derogatory comments about the intellect of oppressed caste students, to proudly narrating their activism against affirmative action in India prior to their admission into Harvard, to a complete cultural monopoly of south Asian/India celebrations the deep sense of alienation, humiliation, and social exclusion I experienced made me constantly vigilant and worried about the consequences of being outed as a Dalit in Harvard’s south Asian circles,” Raj Muthu, an alumnus of Harvard, told Equality Labs."

There are sikhs that take the Mexico to US route and apply for asylum citing racial discrimination in India (where such discrimination is very miniscule). This woke narrative you quote is a bunch of folks trying to extract an advantage from society where they can. In all my 30 years in the US, I've never come across a "caste discrimination" situation. This is the equivalent of a Jewish person being "afraid" that he'd be called a Jew in public. In the US? So what? Ignore the fool, laugh at him and walk away! Why do you need protection from that? If someone refuses to hire you because of your caste, then yes, by all means let's address that. I'm yet to see instances of that.