A tale of two worlds

[Anonymous]

There are a lot of desperate Kid A parents on this thread.

Life is too short. Kid B will be happier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much BS generalization but that is typical from this pit of prestige obsessed vipers. There is a whole spectrum of kids that don't fit in that bucket and a whole other bucket of kids who don't fit the predictions here. Ivy grads toiling away in basic fed jobs. Radford grads who are CFOs, etc.

I know plenty of kids who are "Kid B" (or some mixture in between) who went to "low ranked" schools you people sh-- on here and went on to highly ranked grad schools (including ivies) and are doing well. With little/no help from their Viper Parents.

You people are ill.

Psst, the whole thread is satire based on generalization; not meant to be taken seriously or emotionally. It's not real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conjecture based on results seen amongst my kids friends & friends kids from various parts of the country. Kid A more likely vs Kid B to get t30 private + oos full pay Mich. & Uva. Kid B more likely for UC’s & wisconsin(had to throw that in) & other flagship publics w/merit. Seeing public hs + sob story & urm kids who get into ucla & cal get goose-egged at t30 privates. And vice-versus, seeing kids get into ivies, ivy+ not get ucla or cal. Just what i see, small sample size.

💯 true based on what I saw with my senior this year….
A likely gets into several T30 privates.
B goes to Wisconsin or UCs or Co-Boulder at the worst…

As far as the bolded above, this has definitely been true in our circle - both public’s and private high schools. It did seem more dramatic this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids are B. I rejected the A lifestyle for them. I know they would have ended up at the same places regardless, but we are full pay and my kids are set for life anyway.

There’s a balance btw these 2 caricatures.

My kids are B; I push them to do a tiny bit more on the EC front so they are fully engaged, have a true story (and bc we are at private) / also full pay.

It worked with T15 admission this year; but kids do their own thing generally and have their own unique hobbies/interests.

Jobs are required in our family too even though they don’t need the $$$

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid B may have a better chance of getting into a high ranked college because they “stand out” at a mediocre school but will be less prepared to actually do well in college and may either flunk out or have to switch majors to an easier one.

Nope. Kid B got a 34 ACT with no prep. They’re intrinsically smart. They’ve already got what it takes, no tutors/prep/tiger parenting necessary. This kid will do well no matter where s/he goes to college. And I bet his/her parents are smart enough to know that and not blow 300k on college.

Kid B for the win.

Kid B won’t do well because of the video game addiction and lack of work ethic. There are so many smart underperformers out there who at age 50 are resentfully talking about their ACT score and why the world is against them because they can’t even keep a dead-end job. Brains are nothing without a work ethic.

Kid B actually works. He doesn't depend on his parents' money to buy him into everything.

No amount of money is going to buy you a strong work ethic, motivation, grit, and hunger. These are the traits which allow student A to rise to the top at her school. Everybody at the expensive high school is going to have money, but only a few will graduate at the top. Student A has distinguished herself among her peers, while student B has not. There are going to be other students at the lower school who are going to have a far better resume than student B with equal academic credentials. Also, just because you got a 34 the first time doesn't mean you are naturally smarter than the other kid who scored a 34 with extensive prep. Some kids are not natural test takers and have test anxiety, and need the prep for them to get comfortable with the test.

What are you talking about? In OP's post, Kid A is NOT at the top of their school. Kid A has NOT distinguished himself. And yes, your first sentence is correct. Why do you go on contradict yourself in the rest of your paragraph?

[Anonymous]

Kid B is obviously more intelligent than Kid A because he waltzed in and got a 34 on the ACT without any prep at all. Kid B will go farther in life because he is so much smarter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Both kids have the same ACT score of 34. But kid A had to slave to prep for it while the kid B just walked in and got it without any prep."

It's incorrect to assume that Kid B is not as "smart" as Kid A just because they didn't attend a private school. Both students take rigorous classes, and Kid B easily scores a 34 on his ACT, while Kid A, despite the struggle, also achieved that 34. Many of you incorrectly assume that because the high school has a "low" rating, there aren't any good teachers or rigorous classes at the school. The only real difference seems to be their activities and Kid B is working.

I don't know what will happen with each of these hypothetical kids, but I don't think Kid B is as bad off as some of you think.

This. None of the posters who are trying to prove that the private school and hard working (working too hard probably) kid A will fare better in college acceptances than the "slacker" kid are paying attention to the same ACT score. Obviously kid B has some intelligence that colleges will notice. And getting and keeping a job flipping burgers means Kid B understands responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatevs.

My kid got a 36 (kid A) and doesn't have to study very hard. Courses are rigorous and faculty outstanding. Some amazing, caring, dedicated teachers who go way above and beyond. Scored 5s on every AP exam because the courses prepared him so well (no extra study or prep). Smaller class sizes. Having gone to the public we are zoned for and talking to countless neighbors and their kids' experience there---too large, fights in hallways, inexperienced teachers, no homework/or rigor, grade inflation, we made the correct choice for our kids. Our private also has a HUGE community service element built into the day and breaks. It's character forming in a way you don't get at our public. Values, required courses in ethics and social justice, etc.

I don't care about kid B at all. We could afford it and we sent our kids for the foundational educational experience and the environment.

My kid did get into pretty much everywhere he applied as an unhooked applicant (not recruited athlete, no legacy, no dei box tickers, etc)...and so did his buddies from public school (he attended k-8 with them). IT says more about the friend group than the school. These kids are all motivated and smart and just 'good' kids. He will be going to the same school as two of them.

The thing about this is that your kids are not choosing to do this on their own. It is a requirement of the school. Yes they are learning the value of community service but it is because it is required of them. And accessible during the school day, which means they aren't taking any of their free time to do this. Plenty of public school kids do community service on their own time.

[Anonymous]

Kid B will be able to get along with people from all walks of life and have a healthy nest egg (assuming his parents and Kid A's parents started out the same).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both will end up working for a C student from a top tier fraternity who spent most of his time socializing and networking.

Not anymore. This profile peaks at 22. While he gets a job way beyond what he actually deserves right out of college, he goes sideways through his 20s cycling through glorified sales roles every 18 months and then downward trajectory after that. He keeps up appearances but has nothing special to offer the workplace and stealthily lives off his parents’ diminished assets after they pass. He marries up to maintain lifestyle. College and educational investment was completely wasted on this guy. He is a hollow man.

Sorry you didn't get a bid, geed.

DP
Never change, fraternity losers. Never change.

Losers, right. That's why on a typical SEC campus the 20% of dudes who are in fraternities pull 80% of the good-looking chicks.

[Anonymous]

We hired kid B out of college. He worked at chipotle during summers and had one coop. Kid is smart, personable, can handle all sorts of stuff thrown at him. Has ok grades in engineering from a state school, definitely improved his trajectory, all As towards the end. Found his passion in college and still plays video games but also designed some in college. He wont make crazy $$ but a good solid living, especially if he uses his communication skills and works on leadership and goes for more management roles in a couple years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both will end up working for a C student from a top tier fraternity who spent most of his time socializing and networking.

Not anymore. This profile peaks at 22. While he gets a job way beyond what he actually deserves right out of college, he goes sideways through his 20s cycling through glorified sales roles every 18 months and then downward trajectory after that. He keeps up appearances but has nothing special to offer the workplace and stealthily lives off his parents’ diminished assets after they pass. He marries up to maintain lifestyle. College and educational investment was completely wasted on this guy. He is a hollow man.

Sorry you didn't get a bid, geed.

DP
Never change, fraternity losers. Never change.

Losers, right. That's why on a typical SEC campus the 20% of dudes who are in fraternities pull 80% of the good-looking chicks.

Those are some…interesting…priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both will end up working for a C student from a top tier fraternity who spent most of his time socializing and networking.

Not anymore. This profile peaks at 22. While he gets a job way beyond what he actually deserves right out of college, he goes sideways through his 20s cycling through glorified sales roles every 18 months and then downward trajectory after that. He keeps up appearances but has nothing special to offer the workplace and stealthily lives off his parents’ diminished assets after they pass. He marries up to maintain lifestyle. College and educational investment was completely wasted on this guy. He is a hollow man.

Sorry you didn't get a bid, geed.

DP
Never change, fraternity losers. Never change.

Losers, right. That's why on a typical SEC campus the 20% of dudes who are in fraternities pull 80% of the good-looking chicks.

Those are some…interesting…priorities.

It a priority of literally every college male who isn't a nerd.

[Anonymous]

Kid B, who effortlessly gets A’s and high scores, will probably get into the same colleges as Kid A. But Kid B won’t do as well or be a successful as Kid A because Kid B doesn’t know how to work hard. Kid B’s intellectual horsepower may be greater than Kid A’s, but being a hard worker beats raw intelligence any day of the week.

Signed,
Kid B as an adult

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are two parents.

Parent A sent their child to the most rigorous and best regarded private school.

Parent B sent their child to the local public with 5/10 rating.

Both kids take the most rigorous classes. Both get As. But Parent A’s kid has to work very hard, even has to get tutoring in some areas. Parent B’s kid gets As effortlessly, he spends very little time studying.

Parent A’s kid does math team and a varsity sport, competitions and tournaments. They volunteer on regular basis.

Parent B’s kid does school band and spends his free time on video games. In the summer they work a little at a fast food restaurant to make money for video games.

Both kids have the same amount of APs.

Both kids have the same ACT score of 34. But kid A had to slave to prep for it while the kid B just walked in and got it without any prep.

Kid A will doubtfully be on very top of his class because the peers are overachievers and the competition is tough.

Kid B will most likely be on top of his class because it’s a low performing school and his grades are exceptional.

The questions are:
1) Who will get admitted to a selective college, and
2) Why was parent A so stupid to invest so much money and time to get into the right school, find the right tutors, coaches, ACT prep, etc.

These are very loaded and specific examples. These kuds are also not competing head to head for admissions.

You just don't get it.