"The majority of your children are average. And so are you."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intelligence and income usually goes hand in hand

Hmmm. Seems more like high SES and opportunity go hand in hand.

Agreed, but the intelligence generally comes first. It ruffles most people's egalitarian feathers, but smart people tend to make more money and have smarter kids.

NP. Of the people I went to college with, it was more the mouth-breathing business major types who ended up being rich. The most intelligent people I knew, while still successful, tend not to be rich. They became math professors, programmers, research scientists, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for posting this link; I probably wouldn't have gotten to the article if you hadn't done so. I agree with you that the quote -- which is from Madeline Levine, not Wilma Bowers, BTW -- is provocative, but not very helpful. A better approach might be "Each of your children is special and deserves a chance to find his or her path in life. If that path doesn't stop by a Top Ten school, don't sweat it. We all know many more people who went to other schools and who are successful -- personally, financially and professionally -- than we do folks who went to those Top Ten schools and who accomplished the same thing. Treasure the time you have with your children as they grow. Instead of filling your home with anxiety, fill it with love and encouragement. All will be well."

Parents, if you believe this, then own it and live it. Stop looking over your shoulders to see what other folks are doing. Who cares about the bumper sticker that your neighbor just slapped on his car. Teach your kids to run their own race.

You I like. But they would never have said that in the article, because no one gets famous being reasonable. Sadly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for posting this link; I probably wouldn't have gotten to the article if you hadn't done so. I agree with you that the quote -- which is from Madeline Levine, not Wilma Bowers, BTW -- is provocative, but not very helpful. A better approach might be "Each of your children is special and deserves a chance to find his or her path in life. If that path doesn't stop by a Top Ten school, don't sweat it. We all know many more people who went to other schools and who are successful -- personally, financially and professionally -- than we do folks who went to those Top Ten schools and who accomplished the same thing. Treasure the time you have with your children as they grow. Instead of filling your home with anxiety, fill it with love and encouragement. All will be well."

Parents, if you believe this, then own it and live it. Stop looking over your shoulders to see what other folks are doing. Who cares about the bumper sticker that your neighbor just slapped on his car. Teach your kids to run their own race.

This is my favorite post in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um, yes, you clearly missed my point. But to answer your question, "how many kids at an AVERAGE high school in America gets into HYPS or MIT/CalTech?"

ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF KIDS AS GET INTO FROM MCLEAN HIGH SCHOOL. Does that make it easier for you to understand? Or do you a need a white board and pictures to grasp the concept?

This is silly. A truly median income (50K per year or lower) school in a rural area, an inner city school, or working class suburb doesn't typically get any kids going to those schools. If the kids go to college at all, they go in state, locally--particularly true for rural areas. Of course kids in affluent areas have advantages on a whole to an "average" high school.

Nope - my average small town Texas high school sent kids to Yale, Bryn Mawr, Brown, Penn and more (shocker). Yes, many chose to go to Texas or A&M or Rice, but that's not because they're "average" - it's because they don't want to go to school on the East Coast. Just like many of our children here don't want to go to school in Texas or California, despite top-notch engineering and science schools.

That's not an average small-town HS in Texas. If you thought otherwise, you were mistaken.

Well, let's see - population - less than 50K people. One HS, so 5A. The football team was king (it is Texas after all) so all money went to fund the football team (still does). Median household income for the "metropolitan statistical area" less than 40K and surrounded by farmland. It might not be Dillon (Friday Night Lights) - but it CERTAINLY wasn't McLean. It also was not the suburbs of a major metropolitan city. The HS spawned published writers, renowned artists, doctors, lawyers as well as farmers, homemakers, teachers and others. And there are many, many small cities/large towns like where I grew up all over the U.S., which makes the statement that McLean has average folk more meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for posting this link; I probably wouldn't have gotten to the article if you hadn't done so. I agree with you that the quote -- which is from Madeline Levine, not Wilma Bowers, BTW -- is provocative, but not very helpful. A better approach might be "Each of your children is special and deserves a chance to find his or her path in life. If that path doesn't stop by a Top Ten school, don't sweat it. We all know many more people who went to other schools and who are successful -- personally, financially and professionally -- than we do folks who went to those Top Ten schools and who accomplished the same thing. Treasure the time you have with your children as they grow. Instead of filling your home with anxiety, fill it with love and encouragement. All will be well."

Parents, if you believe this, then own it and live it. Stop looking over your shoulders to see what other folks are doing. Who cares about the bumper sticker that your neighbor just slapped on his car. Teach your kids to run their own race.

I love this. This may be why not being in a pressure cooker like McLean can be better - it allows children the space to "run their own race" without comparing themselves to the 10 Suzy's in the next lane who are being pushed to go to Ivy league. Even if you aren't pushing your child, your child can absorb the pressure from all the kids around him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intelligence and income usually goes hand in hand

Hmmm. Seems more like high SES and opportunity go hand in hand.

Agreed, but the intelligence generally comes first. It ruffles most people's egalitarian feathers, but smart people tend to make more money and have smarter kids.

They tend to have kids that are more average than they are. It's called regression towards the mean.

Intelligence may come first for the first generation, but after that, it's just a function of SES. Y'all were born on third base and think you hit a triple a la George W. Bush and Al Gore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The majority of the people who lives in McLean are NOT average. That statement is stupid.

(No, I don't live there.)

I take it that you were one of those shocked, appalled, gasping parents in the crowd then? Yes, the majority of people who live in McLean (and elsewhere) are average. As stunning as this may seem, about 1-2 of all of the brilliant, awesome, perfect kids from McLean High School will get into Harvard each year. 1-3 more (or the same ones, more likely) will get into Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, Chicago, Columbia, and CalTech. A few more than that will get into Penn, Cornell, Brown, Dartmouth, Northwestern, and Georgetown. That leaves . . . well, you can do the math. Almost EVERYONE ELSE. The conclusion here is that all of these awesome, amazing, brilliant straight A kids . . . actually aren't that special. This shouldn't be that stunning of a revelation.

Those of you that went to Harvard, maybe your kids will get in. But they probably won't.

This, of course, doesn't make them idiots. And it doesn't mean they are destined for an unhappy life. But this entitled, blind, unrealistic attitude of seemingly every parent in this area that "my kid is clearly destined for greatness" is precisely what the PTA pres in the article is railing against.

LOLOL how many kids at an AVERAGE high school in America get into HYPS or MIT / CalTech?

That tells you right there that these kids are not average!

McLean has an average SAT score in Reading, Math and Critical Writing that is about 100 points each above the national average. That's nice, but it's not all that. It's exactly the amount of improvement that you would expect for the SES background that these kids come from. The SAT and ACT are strongly biased to favor wealthy SES students, and McLean students do about average for that group. It's great that these kids get into HYPS and MIT/Caltech, but it's not because they have natural talent. Their parents prep them obsessively. They know how to play the game and how to package their kids.

These kids aren't uber-special. They're average for who they and where they come from. They're not going to set the world on fire. They're really kind of boring people. They do everything just right. They follow the rules. I wonder if they're going to get to 40 and have a huge midlife crisis because they've been following the rules the whole time and never took a chance or did a single creative thing or a single unexpected thing in their whole lives. They don't follow their hearts. I'm not even sure they know their hearts. They experience identity foreclosure or identity diffusion at high rates, either becoming little cookie cutter versions of their parents or never committing to anything at all.

You took something that had a grain of truth in it, and then ran way too far with it. So the impression I'm left with is that you're either really resentful or you're trying very hard to validate your own life experiences, whatever they may have been. You don't know those kids that well. Some are, in fact, brilliant, and will go on to do some pretty amazing things. Others may not, but it doesn't mean their futures are bleak.

Completely agree, especially with the bolded part. I detect a whole lot of resentment in PP's post.

Here's what you detect: experience. I advise a student organization at a top 10 university. I am an alumna of that university. I am also a first generation college graduation. Thes kids that I work with are highly successful by any stretch of the imagination. 90% of them are from high SES families. However, many of them drift aimlessly. They don't have a plan, except the one their parents gave them. They haven't really formed an identity outside the one that their parents chose for them. They aren't committed to anything, other than doing what their parents tell them to do. The rate of failure to launch after graduation is pretty high, because these kids are only working to make their parents happy. These kids have all the talent in the world, but don't have the slightest idea what they want to do. They're excellent at achieving the goals set by their parents, but those goals are pointless if they aren't goals set by the kids. Parents like the parents in that article piss me off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for posting this link; I probably wouldn't have gotten to the article if you hadn't done so. I agree with you that the quote -- which is from Madeline Levine, not Wilma Bowers, BTW -- is provocative, but not very helpful. A better approach might be "Each of your children is special and deserves a chance to find his or her path in life. If that path doesn't stop by a Top Ten school, don't sweat it. We all know many more people who went to other schools and who are successful -- personally, financially and professionally -- than we do folks who went to those Top Ten schools and who accomplished the same thing. Treasure the time you have with your children as they grow. Instead of filling your home with anxiety, fill it with love and encouragement. All will be well."

Parents, if you believe this, then own it and live it. Stop looking over your shoulders to see what other folks are doing. Who cares about the bumper sticker that your neighbor just slapped on his car. Teach your kids to run their own race.

I love this. This may be why not being in a pressure cooker like McLean can be better - it allows children the space to "run their own race" without comparing themselves to the 10 Suzy's in the next lane who are being pushed to go to Ivy league. Even if you aren't pushing your child, your child can absorb the pressure from all the kids around him.

I'm the quoted poster, and I'm glad this struck a chord with you. I have to say, though, that my kids went to and now attend (youngest still in HS) a school that is widely considered to be a pressure cooker. You're absolutely right that in those schools you have to try even harder to cultivate your child's inner voice, but it is possible. My problem with Levine's argument is that it seems -- or at least its adherents often seem -- to blame everybody else around them. The argument becomes "I can't tell my kid not to be obsessed with grades because that's not what you're telling your kid." This is nothing but mutually-assured destruction. If your message to your kids is "run your own race, baby"*, then you have to walk that walk yourself.

*This is one of my favorite child-rearing mottos and is inspired by Marlo Thomas's recounting of her dad's message to her when she was growing up. Shortly before she made her Broadway debut, a newspaper profile of her focused on comparing her to her dad. She was in tears because she thought she could never live up to his accomplishments. The night before her show opened he sent her a horseshoe-shaped bouquet with this message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm the quoted poster, and I'm glad this struck a chord with you. I have to say, though, that my kids went to and now attend (youngest still in HS) a school that is widely considered to be a pressure cooker. You're absolutely right that in those schools you have to try even harder to cultivate your child's inner voice, but it is possible. My problem with Levine's argument is that it seems -- or at least its adherents often seem -- to blame everybody else around them. The argument becomes "I can't tell my kid not to be obsessed with grades because that's not what you're telling your kid." This is nothing but mutually-assured destruction. If your message to your kids is "run your own race, baby"*, then you have to walk that walk yourself.

*This is one of my favorite child-rearing mottos and is inspired by Marlo Thomas's recounting of her dad's message to her when she was growing up. Shortly before she made her Broadway debut, a newspaper profile of her focused on comparing her to her dad. She was in tears because she thought she could never live up to his accomplishments. The night before her show opened he sent her a horseshoe-shaped bouquet with this message.

I think I may take this up as my personal mantra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Of the people I went to college with, it was more the mouth-breathing business major types who ended up being rich. The most intelligent people I knew, while still successful, tend not to be rich. They became math professors, programmers, research scientists, etc.

Like many people you are confusing intelligence with "being an intellectual". The business majors weren't stupid -- they just weren't interested in math / science.

[Anonymous]

Professors, programmers, and research sciences are still upper middle class professions that make a decent living, and those people are well off by most standards except warped DCUM ones. They aren't raking in the big bucks compared to business types, but their kids, in terms of opportunity will be well above average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Of the people I went to college with, it was more the mouth-breathing business major types who ended up being rich. The most intelligent people I knew, while still successful, tend not to be rich. They became math professors, programmers, research scientists, etc.

Like many people you are confusing intelligence with "being an intellectual". The business majors weren't stupid -- they just weren't interested in math / science.

No, I'm very specifically talking about intelligence. I took classes with these people, worked on projects together, spoke with them at length on a variety of topics. Spending that much time with people, you can certainly glean their level of intelligence. Not trying to say that all business majors are lacking in that respect, or that I don't also know a few extremely intelligent wealthy people, but to act like HHI directly correlates with a high level of intelligence is faulty logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intelligence and income usually goes hand in hand

Hmmm. Seems more like high SES and opportunity go hand in hand.

Agreed, but the intelligence generally comes first. It ruffles most people's egalitarian feathers, but smart people tend to make more money and have smarter kids.

NP. Of the people I went to college with, it was more the mouth-breathing business major types who ended up being rich. The most intelligent people I knew, while still successful, tend not to be rich. They became math professors, programmers, research scientists, etc.

This is what I have observed and experienced as well.

There are many rich people of very average intelligence out there.

[Anonymous]

Well, let's see - population - less than 50K people. One HS, so 5A. The football team was king (it is Texas after all) so all money went to fund the football team (still does). Median household income for the "metropolitan statistical area" less than 40K and surrounded by farmland. It might not be Dillon (Friday Night Lights) - but it CERTAINLY wasn't McLean. It also was not the suburbs of a major metropolitan city. The HS spawned published writers, renowned artists, doctors, lawyers as well as farmers, homemakers, teachers and others. And there are many, many small cities/large towns like where I grew up all over the U.S., which makes the statement that McLean has average folk more meaningful.

This is not a typical small town of that nature. Maybe the culture of having writers, and artist influenced the overall culture of the town. While there might be hundreds of small towns like this across the US, most small towns like this do not send kids to Yale and Bryn Mawr every year, and they are completely the exception. Most small towns with low median income surrounded by farmland have less than half their kids going to college at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The majority of the people who lives in McLean are NOT average. That statement is stupid.

(No, I don't live there.)

I take it that you were one of those shocked, appalled, gasping parents in the crowd then? Yes, the majority of people who live in McLean (and elsewhere) are average. As stunning as this may seem, about 1-2 of all of the brilliant, awesome, perfect kids from McLean High School will get into Harvard each year. 1-3 more (or the same ones, more likely) will get into Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, Chicago, Columbia, and CalTech. A few more than that will get into Penn, Cornell, Brown, Dartmouth, Northwestern, and Georgetown. That leaves . . . well, you can do the math. Almost EVERYONE ELSE. The conclusion here is that all of these awesome, amazing, brilliant straight A kids . . . actually aren't that special. This shouldn't be that stunning of a revelation.

Those of you that went to Harvard, maybe your kids will get in. But they probably won't.

This, of course, doesn't make them idiots. And it doesn't mean they are destined for an unhappy life. But this entitled, blind, unrealistic attitude of seemingly every parent in this area that "my kid is clearly destined for greatness" is precisely what the PTA pres in the article is railing against.

LOLOL how many kids at an AVERAGE high school in America get into HYPS or MIT / CalTech?

That tells you right there that these kids are not average!

McLean has an average SAT score in Reading, Math and Critical Writing that is about 100 points each above the national average. That's nice, but it's not all that. It's exactly the amount of improvement that you would expect for the SES background that these kids come from. The SAT and ACT are strongly biased to favor wealthy SES students, and McLean students do about average for that group. It's great that these kids get into HYPS and MIT/Caltech, but it's not because they have natural talent. Their parents prep them obsessively. They know how to play the game and how to package their kids.

These kids aren't uber-special. They're average for who they and where they come from. They're not going to set the world on fire. They're really kind of boring people. They do everything just right. They follow the rules. I wonder if they're going to get to 40 and have a huge midlife crisis because they've been following the rules the whole time and never took a chance or did a single creative thing or a single unexpected thing in their whole lives. They don't follow their hearts. I'm not even sure they know their hearts. They experience identity foreclosure or identity diffusion at high rates, either becoming little cookie cutter versions of their parents or never committing to anything at all.

You took something that had a grain of truth in it, and then ran way too far with it. So the impression I'm left with is that you're either really resentful or you're trying very hard to validate your own life experiences, whatever they may have been. You don't know those kids that well. Some are, in fact, brilliant, and will go on to do some pretty amazing things. Others may not, but it doesn't mean their futures are bleak.

Completely agree, especially with the bolded part. I detect a whole lot of resentment in PP's post.

Here's what you detect: experience. I advise a student organization at a top 10 university. I am an alumna of that university. I am also a first generation college graduation. Thes kids that I work with are highly successful by any stretch of the imagination. 90% of them are from high SES families. However, many of them drift aimlessly. They don't have a plan, except the one their parents gave them. They haven't really formed an identity outside the one that their parents chose for them. They aren't committed to anything, other than doing what their parents tell them to do. The rate of failure to launch after graduation is pretty high, because these kids are only working to make their parents happy. These kids have all the talent in the world, but don't have the slightest idea what they want to do. They're excellent at achieving the goals set by their parents, but those goals are pointless if they aren't goals set by the kids. Parents like the parents in that article piss me off.

You "advise a student organization" at a university. Wow - I'm totaly blown over by your expertise and depth of knowledge.

Thanks for confirming that you view the world through your own prism to justify your own experience. I'm sure you can sell that to others, but I know too many kids from this area who are succeeding and forging ahead in life to buy these platitudes. Most of them are quite appreciative of the advantages they've enjoyed, although they are certainly bright enough to talk about how stressful things were in HS if they know that's what you want to hear from them.