Emotional needs of our students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a question. Does graduating from a top 20 college truly change a person's life?


If not perhaps we should turn down a degree or two the high school pressure cooker which is currently sending out the message to many that life if not worth living without an Ivy League degree.

But back to my original question and I am sincere in asking it. Will a degree from a top 20 college under normal circumstances all other things being equal, significantly improve the quality of ones life?

Of course not. Look at it this way, I happen to be the product of the "best" nursery school in NYC and stayed on that track through to an Ivy League college and grad school. My DH is the product of regular public school and a non top 20 college. If $$$ is the measure, he outearns me considerably. Otherwise, I'd say we're equally happy (at least I hope so!). All his college friends also have very nice lives (extravagantly paid i-banker, ifi banker, movie "star" - ok the last one is not really a star, but he makes a living and seems happy). And the people from my string of prestigious educational institutions seem to be all over the map in terms of happiness and successful careers, Clearly, this is anecdotal, but no one is doomed to a salt mine by not attending an Ivy.

Thanks for responding. I feel if doing and achieving the requisite things necessary to be accepted to a top 20 school come to an individual somewhat naturally then by all means they should. However, if a person needs to go to the extreme measures changing themselves to the point if contorting themselves into the shape of a pretzel to gain admission then the psychological and social sacrifices are too great. You know a banker and I know others as well who have found happiness taking less established routes to success.

For students who are on Top 20 track, I wonder how much pressure they place on themselves? I also wonder about peer pressure. I guess having watched enough movies like "The Paper Chase", I should know that high achieving individuals can be as cruel as anyone else, but I still want to believe that smart people are smart enough to realize they too have weaknesses and as a result have empathy for others. I wonder if kids on top 20 track are supportive of their peers or if it's such a competetive space that they savor the disappointments of others? If what I'm suggesting does actually exist does it trickle down and permeate the fabric of entire high schools like the ones which have been scrutinized this week? Can academic competition in high schools become so culturally toxic that it affects every strata of students regardless the long term goals of individual students?

In a schools of high achievers do those high achievers have inflated egos and do lower achieving students suffer from low self-esteem?

My string of consciousness really got away from me this time!

Thanks

My DC is in a very competitive HS surrounded by extremely driven kids and I noticed that the kids are not very empathetic and very competitive. They are focused on future professions, income etc. for themselves and often discuss how much money their parents make.

It seems the kids are very focused on maximizing their chances for making lot of money and they figure getting into one of the top colleges and grad school/med school etc. will lead to making good money and thus the need for high GPA, high SAT score, officer positions, outstanding ECs, adequate volunteer hours and the most rigorous courses possible as required by top colleges. This creates lot of stress. I also noticed something that is somewhat controversial. One of the kid is Hispanic and he supposedly said that he doesn't have to have the above and he only needs "ABC" GPA to get into one of the top colleges so he was counting himself lucky.

[Anonymous]

It seems the kids are very focused on maximizing their chances for making lot of money and they figure getting into one of the top colleges and grad school/med school etc. will lead to making good money and thus the need for high GPA, high SAT score, officer positions, outstanding ECs, adequate volunteer hours and the most rigorous courses possible as required by top colleges. This creates lot of stress. I also noticed something that is somewhat controversial. One of the kid is Hispanic and he supposedly said that he doesn't have to have the above and he only needs "ABC" GPA to get into one of the top colleges so he was counting himself lucky.

there have always been poseurs. This is nothing new. Go read about Senator Elizabeth Warren in high school. She was quite the poseur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A problem in this area is there is such a large concentration of parents who went to Ivies or other very good schools that the kids in this area feel a very palpable pressure to go to those schools. That puts a heavy burden to excel academically on kids, especially since there are so many other kids in the same class/school feeling the same way. The pressure could be self imposed or could be from real expectations imposed by parents, but, either way, it is magnified in this area because of the large number of kids competing to be among the chosen few. I'm not criticizing the drive to get into Ivies, I'm just pointing out that while most of the time the demographics in this area provides our kids with benefits, it can at times create unintended burdens. Each ivy will only take so many kids from one school, the kids know this, and the pressure begins. The kids also want to be as successful professionally as their parents, which is another high bar in this area. Again, this is not a criticism of having a drive to be successful, I'm just pointing out that sometimes we forget or don't notice some of the pressures our kids face.

As I said, quotas are a serious problem. Fairness isn't really fair.

No, the problem is the entitlement mentality implicit in this statement. Your child is not entitled to admission to an Ivy League school or to UVA. Nor, for that matter, are you or your child entitled to fairness. WTH does fairness even mean in this context? Why is your straight A student more entitled to admission than the tens of thousands of other straight A students? Why isn't it just as "fair" for a college to decide it wants students from a variety of different backgrounds?

There is a certain class of parent--bright, highly educated, overachieving and overpaid--who seems in some essential way to be stuck in 3rd grade emotionally. "That's not fair! My child works so hard, she deserves this!" My god, grow the fuck up! Life isn't fair. And you are doing a grave disservice to your children by encouraging them to just work a little harder so they can enjoy all those special opportunities they so richly deserve. The unspoken message you send to your child is: if I don't get what I want, it must be because I didn't deserve it. What you fail to teach your children is that no one gets what they want all the time, no matter how smart you are or how hard you work. What you fail to teach your children is to expect occasional disappointment and the resiliency to handle it when it comes.

No my child isn't entitled, nor did I say that. That IS MY POINT. T he child who gets in who doesn't make the cut grade-wise, standardized test wise isn't either. But that child gets in. Why? You know damn well what the answer is. "Fairness". It's not FAIR that you have money and they don't. It's not FAIR, so we are going to ensure there are tight quotas coming out of that school with wealthy kids. We are going to punish the KIDS simply because their PARENTS have done well.

You clearly aren't reading the thread. What you are doing is saying "Oh, Langley parents are wealthy and I hate them for that. Therefore they think they are entitled to everything."

You have colossally missed the point; but thanks for making *my* point so neatly.

You think that if things were "fair," your well-qualified child would get in. But that isn't true. There are tens of thousands of kids who look JUST LIKE YOUR KID. They can't all get into Harvard. There is no "fair" way to allow access to every one. Your child is working so hard not to get into Harvard but to be eligible to buy a lottery ticket to Harvard. It's not "fair," because there aren't enough spaces for all the eligible kids.

Even if there were enough space, you don't get to make the rules. Someone else had decided that there are benefits *to the school* to having kids from different backgrounds. It's THEIR school. They get to make the rules. THAT'S fair to them. It would not be fair to Harvard to make them play by YOUR rules. And that's the point: there is no objectively fair way to admit students to college. You can say it's not fair to allow the kids of wealhty alums in to Harvard, too. But if I'm an alum donating lots to Harvard, well admission for my kids seems pretty fair to me.

The other thing I will point out is that you are arguing that your child is disadvantaged in the game of life because she has well-off parents. Are you kidding? If you really think there is an advantage to raising your children in poorer circumstances and sending them to schools with fewer resources, then why haven't you done so?

This is exactly what I am talking about. You are so entitled in your thinking, you think someone is doing you a bad turn. You and your children are victims of discrimination. "It's not fair!!!"

It's like the opposite of the old saying. You weren't born on 3rd base and think you hit a triple. Your child was born on third base and you think she is stuck on first.

Missing out on Harvard is not a "punishment." But if you think so, no wonder your kids are so anxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A problem in this area is there is such a large concentration of parents who went to Ivies or other very good schools that the kids in this area feel a very palpable pressure to go to those schools. That puts a heavy burden to excel academically on kids, especially since there are so many other kids in the same class/school feeling the same way. The pressure could be self imposed or could be from real expectations imposed by parents, but, either way, it is magnified in this area because of the large number of kids competing to be among the chosen few. I'm not criticizing the drive to get into Ivies, I'm just pointing out that while most of the time the demographics in this area provides our kids with benefits, it can at times create unintended burdens. Each ivy will only take so many kids from one school, the kids know this, and the pressure begins. The kids also want to be as successful professionally as their parents, which is another high bar in this area. Again, this is not a criticism of having a drive to be successful, I'm just pointing out that sometimes we forget or don't notice some of the pressures our kids face.

As I said, quotas are a serious problem. Fairness isn't really fair.

No, the problem is the entitlement mentality implicit in this statement. Your child is not entitled to admission to an Ivy League school or to UVA. Nor, for that matter, are you or your child entitled to fairness. WTH does fairness even mean in this context? Why is your straight A student more entitled to admission than the tens of thousands of other straight A students? Why isn't it just as "fair" for a college to decide it wants students from a variety of different backgrounds?

There is a certain class of parent--bright, highly educated, overachieving and overpaid--who seems in some essential way to be stuck in 3rd grade emotionally. "That's not fair! My child works so hard, she deserves this!" My god, grow the fuck up! Life isn't fair. And you are doing a grave disservice to your children by encouraging them to just work a little harder so they can enjoy all those special opportunities they so richly deserve. The unspoken message you send to your child is: if I don't get what I want, it must be because I didn't deserve it. What you fail to teach your children is that no one gets what they want all the time, no matter how smart you are or how hard you work. What you fail to teach your children is to expect occasional disappointment and the resiliency to handle it when it comes.

Because some of those children are being accepted simply because they are from different backgrounds or are different races, not because they earned it. If they earned it, fantastic, they belong there! If not, then they are taking up a space. The more spaces taking up that way, the less there are and the more other kids have to fight for them, creating this nasty environment.

NP here. The teacher wrote such an insightful, thought-provoking post and the one statement you take away from it is that quotas are the problem. What a shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A spinoff from the suicide thread.

Some questions that may help start this.

Our kids are students with lots of demands. How are they handling those demands?

Who should be helping them learn to manage this for themselves and when does it start?

Is FCPS really a pressure cooker across the board or is the world our kids growing up in that much harder regardless of where they attend?

Getting rid of TJ and the message the existence of that school sends would be a good start.

While getting rid of TJ, get rid of UVA as well since you clearly do not want good educational institutions. Why stop there, get rid of all top public high schools in the area and the country as well. Happy now?

Can you explain to me why the kids at school A must have a GPA and test scores much higher than kids at school B, in order to be accepted to UVA?

What does that have to do with meeting the emotional needs of our students?

It's because the kids in these schools can't "even" get into UVA. That is the message they receive, they can't "even" get into the state school that 20 years ago was our safety school. That causes stress.

UVA was never a "safety" school. Tech or JMU, yes, but not UVA.

Oh please. UVA is very much a safety school for those who can't make it to the Ivies. There is a safety school out there for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A spinoff from the suicide thread.

Some questions that may help start this.

Our kids are students with lots of demands. How are they handling those demands?

Who should be helping them learn to manage this for themselves and when does it start?

Is FCPS really a pressure cooker across the board or is the world our kids growing up in that much harder regardless of where they attend?

Getting rid of TJ and the message the existence of that school sends would be a good start.

While getting rid of TJ, get rid of UVA as well since you clearly do not want good educational institutions. Why stop there, get rid of all top public high schools in the area and the country as well. Happy now?

TJ, UVa and the Ivies as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In 2004, I graduated from one of the top high schools in the country. There was a huge drug and alcohol problem that parents and teachers turned a blind eye to. What many parents don't realize is the amount of pressure they put on their children.

I had a brand new teacher my junior year of high school. We were discussing his grading in one class and he said something along the lines of "I give Cs for average work". The entire class went crazy. So the teacher continued and asked what happens if we get a B. Most kids said they got grounded or had privileges taken away.

We were expected to excel in sports and music while maintaining as many AP classes as possible and volunteering in our "spare time".

When college acceptance letters came out, it was massive competition amongst the parents with who kid got into what school.

Parents don't want to believe that they play a huge part in the pressure put on these kids. Instead, they make themselves believe it is all for their good and the future, but they never consider just how much these kids struggle with the here and now.

I lost 3 friends to suicide in my 4 years of high school. Not one parent believed their friends when we approached them about the incredible stress they were under and how we saw it changing them.

+100 After you have said it a few times, you have to stop saying it. You cannot just say to another parent over and over that you are worried. It is sad, but people are just not open to hearing this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A spinoff from the suicide thread.

Some questions that may help start this.

Our kids are students with lots of demands. How are they handling those demands?

Who should be helping them learn to manage this for themselves and when does it start?

Is FCPS really a pressure cooker across the board or is the world our kids growing up in that much harder regardless of where they attend?

Getting rid of TJ and the message the existence of that school sends would be a good start.

While getting rid of TJ, get rid of UVA as well since you clearly do not want good educational institutions. Why stop there, get rid of all top public high schools in the area and the country as well. Happy now?

Can you explain to me why the kids at school A must have a GPA and test scores much higher than kids at school B, in order to be accepted to UVA?

What does that have to do with meeting the emotional needs of our students?

It's because the kids in these schools can't "even" get into UVA. That is the message they receive, they can't "even" get into the state school that 20 years ago was our safety school. That causes stress.

UVA was never a "safety" school. Tech or JMU, yes, but not UVA.

Oh please. UVA is very much a safety school for those who can't make it to the Ivies. There is a safety school out there for everyone.

And that's a good thing, right?

If the worse thing that's going to happen to your child is that they "have" to go to a "safety" school like UVA, I think that's cause for celebration, not hand-wringing.

Life is good, people. Relax and perhaps your children will, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:17:43, honestly,parents have ultimate control over the schools as they vote for the school board. Administrators are looking to further their careers and some feel pressure to bend when a parent leans on them.

Can a tenured teacher be fired, yes or no. How long does it take?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely, and how long depends on the circumstances. Breaks law? Immediately on admin leave and after investigation if found guilty - gone. Poor evaluations (not just one, but documentation showing a long term pattern of poor performance, absolutely. A tenured teacher became tenured via years of documented good performance, so one bad observation of a lesson or upset parent (unless there is a serious alegation) isn't going to cut it. Exact numbers I don't have, but maybe someone from admin. can chime in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A problem in this area is there is such a large concentration of parents who went to Ivies or other very good schools that the kids in this area feel a very palpable pressure to go to those schools. That puts a heavy burden to excel academically on kids, especially since there are so many other kids in the same class/school feeling the same way. The pressure could be self imposed or could be from real expectations imposed by parents, but, either way, it is magnified in this area because of the large number of kids competing to be among the chosen few. I'm not criticizing the drive to get into Ivies, I'm just pointing out that while most of the time the demographics in this area provides our kids with benefits, it can at times create unintended burdens. Each ivy will only take so many kids from one school, the kids know this, and the pressure begins. The kids also want to be as successful professionally as their parents, which is another high bar in this area. Again, this is not a criticism of having a drive to be successful, I'm just pointing out that sometimes we forget or don't notice some of the pressures our kids face.

As I said, quotas are a serious problem. Fairness isn't really fair.

No, the problem is the entitlement mentality implicit in this statement. Your child is not entitled to admission to an Ivy League school or to UVA. Nor, for that matter, are you or your child entitled to fairness. WTH does fairness even mean in this context? Why is your straight A student more entitled to admission than the tens of thousands of other straight A students? Why isn't it just as "fair" for a college to decide it wants students from a variety of different backgrounds?

There is a certain class of parent--bright, highly educated, overachieving and overpaid--who seems in some essential way to be stuck in 3rd grade emotionally. "That's not fair! My child works so hard, she deserves this!" My god, grow the fuck up! Life isn't fair. And you are doing a grave disservice to your children by encouraging them to just work a little harder so they can enjoy all those special opportunities they so richly deserve. The unspoken message you send to your child is: if I don't get what I want, it must be because I didn't deserve it. What you fail to teach your children is that no one gets what they want all the time, no matter how smart you are or how hard you work. What you fail to teach your children is to expect occasional disappointment and the resiliency to handle it when it comes.

No my child isn't entitled, nor did I say that. That IS MY POINT. T he child who gets in who doesn't make the cut grade-wise, standardized test wise isn't either. But that child gets in. Why? You know damn well what the answer is. "Fairness". It's not FAIR that you have money and they don't. It's not FAIR, so we are going to ensure there are tight quotas coming out of that school with wealthy kids. We are going to punish the KIDS simply because their PARENTS have done well.

You clearly aren't reading the thread. What you are doing is saying "Oh, Langley parents are wealthy and I hate them for that. Therefore they think they are entitled to everything."

You have colossally missed the point; but thanks for making *my* point so neatly.

You think that if things were "fair," your well-qualified child would get in. But that isn't true. There are tens of thousands of kids who look JUST LIKE YOUR KID. They can't all get into Harvard. There is no "fair" way to allow access to every one. Your child is working so hard not to get into Harvard but to be eligible to buy a lottery ticket to Harvard. It's not "fair," because there aren't enough spaces for all the eligible kids.

Even if there were enough space, you don't get to make the rules. Someone else had decided that there are benefits *to the school* to having kids from different backgrounds. It's THEIR school. They get to make the rules. THAT'S fair to them. It would not be fair to Harvard to make them play by YOUR rules. And that's the point: there is no objectively fair way to admit students to college. You can say it's not fair to allow the kids of wealhty alums in to Harvard, too. But if I'm an alum donating lots to Harvard, well admission for my kids seems pretty fair to me.

The other thing I will point out is that you are arguing that your child is disadvantaged in the game of life because she has well-off parents. Are you kidding? If you really think there is an advantage to raising your children in poorer circumstances and sending them to schools with fewer resources, then why haven't you done so?

This is exactly what I am talking about. You are so entitled in your thinking, you think someone is doing you a bad turn. You and your children are victims of discrimination. "It's not fair!!!"

It's like the opposite of the old saying. You weren't born on 3rd base and think you hit a triple. Your child was born on third base and you think she is stuck on first.

Missing out on Harvard is not a "punishment." But if you think so, no wonder your kids are so anxious.

You realize I am the parent who is NOT pushing for this, right? Of course you don't. I don't give a rat's ass if my kids go to Harvard. Never have. When you have entire schools of kids being punished because their parents dared do well, that's just wrong. Life isn't a box of skittles. Why should anyone's kid have to get a much higher goal to compete for the same spot?

Don't even mention certain groups of kids being singled out to get in state tuition when they are not residents of that state.

[Anonymous]

That's gpa, not goal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely, and how long depends on the circumstances. Breaks law? Immediately on admin leave and after investigation if found guilty - gone. Poor evaluations (not just one, but documentation showing a long term pattern of poor performance, absolutely. A tenured teacher became tenured via years of documented good performance, so one bad observation of a lesson or upset parent (unless there is a serious alegation) isn't going to cut it. Exact numbers I don't have, but maybe someone from admin. can chime in.

Paid leave. Ask the state of NY. How long a pattern? Years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely, and how long depends on the circumstances. Breaks law? Immediately on admin leave and after investigation if found guilty - gone. Poor evaluations (not just one, but documentation showing a long term pattern of poor performance, absolutely. A tenured teacher became tenured via years of documented good performance, so one bad observation of a lesson or upset parent (unless there is a serious alegation) isn't going to cut it. Exact numbers I don't have, but maybe someone from admin. can chime in.

LA Times: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/03/local/me-teachers3

It's remarkably difficult to fire a tenured public school teacher in California, a Times investigation has found. The path can be laborious and labyrinthine, in some cases involving years of investigation, union grievances, administrative appeals, court challenges and re-hearings.

Not only is the process arduous, but some districts are particularly unsuccessful in navigating its complexities. The Los Angeles Unified School District sees the majority of its appealed dismissals overturned, and its administrators are far less likely even to try firing a tenured teacher than those in other districts.

The Times reviewed every case on record in the last 15 years in which a tenured employee was fired by a California school district and formally contested the decision before a review commission: 159 in all (not including about two dozen in which the records were destroyed). The newspaper also examined court and school district records and interviewed scores of people, including principals, teachers, union officials, district administrators, parents and students.

Among the findings:

* Building a case for dismissal is so time-consuming, costly and draining for principals and administrators that many say they don't make the effort except in the most egregious cases. The vast majority of firings stem from blatant misconduct, including sexual abuse, other immoral or illegal behavior, insubordination or repeated violation of rules such as showing up on time.

* Although districts generally press ahead with only the strongest cases, even these get knocked down more than a third of the time by the specially convened review panels, which have the discretion to restore teachers' jobs even when grounds for dismissal are proved.

* Jettisoning a teacher solely because he or she can't teach is rare. In 80% of the dismissals that were upheld, classroom performance was not even a factor.

When teaching is at issue, years of effort -- and thousands of dollars -- sometimes go into rehabilitating the teacher as students suffer. Over the three years before he was fired, one struggling math teacher in Stockton was observed 13 times by school officials, failed three year-end evaluations, was offered a more desirable assignment and joined a mentoring program as most of his ninth-grade students flunked his courses.

[Anonymous]

NY and VA are not the same. Yes, it is probably paid leave until they are proven of wrong doing...innocent until proven guilty...