Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

OMG---yes, that certainly would help trigger mental health issues! If outside tutoring is not allowed, then the university needs to provide 1-1 tutoring for anyone who needs it. And how is tutoring a "honor code violation". A tutor cannot take your midterm or finals for you. Entire point of college is to learn, so why shouldn't a kid be able to get the extra help they need to actually learn the material?

I'd like to see an Honor Code citation for the notion that students are "forbidden from getting outside tutoring." I thought the Honor Code pertained primarily to exams, but I could see it being an Honor Code violation if a student paid for a third party to complete a problem set or write a computer program for them. Presumably the tutors associated with the university tutoring have been schooled on where to draw the line between helping a student and doing a student's work for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton alumna here, graduated in the 1990s. It is great to be a Princeton alum, but being a student at Princeton is a mixed bag. I made great friends and it has helped my career at various points. But academically Princeton has been a really difficult place for at least 100 years.

Agree completely with this — also an alum from the 90s. I love Princeton more the further from graduation I get. Love my friends from that time. I did not love going there. Have complicated feelings about it. It’s harsh in certain ways, in part because the junior faculty are themselves gunning for permanent positions they mostly do not get.

I loved going there, not that it was a cake walk. Academically, I did very well from the outset - came from an FCPS public and always held my own with kids from elite privates. Was too naive to think there was any reason why I couldn't thrive, and my high school friends were going to places like Yale, MIT, Duke, Northwestern, and UVA, so I was used to a strong peer group. Socially, it was more of an adjustment, as it was clear a lot of the wealthier kids and athletes felt like they were on another level. But I found my people (and a time-intensive activity) by sophomore year and it was great from then on. The fact that assistant professors might themselves be gunning for tenure was not something that particularly affected students, except insofar as they had to decide whether they wanted to excel in the classroom or through their research.

Most of my friends loved the place, too, and continue to do so, although some are sheepish about their affection for the place. There's a "stickiness" about the place that you don't find everywhere - it burrows itself into your consciousness and they don't let go of you, either (they will track you down to the ends of the earth to send you PAW and "Annual Giving" solicitations). I'm quite sure my experience, and those of my friends, are more typical than the small number of alums who've come on here and expressed mixed feelings.

Since my time there, Princeton has gotten considerably more diverse racially and economically, but students seem to be more STEM-oriented and pre-professional, and there seem to be more students who can't handle not always being at the top of their class and/or are burdened by "imposter syndrome." I'm not sure what the answer is for that, other than to have a longer orientation period and more focused mental health screenings. But it doesn't have much to do with whether a kid thinks they're going to get into Ivy Club or not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fact is most stem courses are graded on a curve....so unless everyone is earning a 90%+ in the course, your grade will be determined by "the overall level of smarts in the course". Much easier to get an A/B+ in Organic Chemistry at a school where you are in the top 20% of students vs one where everyone is a striver/4.0+ mentality

This comment is dead on target. Further, at many schools non-STEM courses will curve to maybe a 3.3/4 median grade, while STEM courses will curve to a 3.0 median. Curving to 3.0 median means that about half the class is getting a B- or lower. This can be crushing to a student used to all As or a mix of As and Bs, especially if there if family pressure on GPA / grades.

Yup! My kid is at at T40. Took Orgo freshman year (so it's all freshman with AP/IB credit for reg chem). Well apparently over 50% of the class had already taken some Orgo, most the FULL year of it. But they had to retake to get actual college credit. So the average in the freshman Orgo on first midterm was 87%, where the avg on midterm 1 in the regular Orgo course (taken by mostly sophomores/juniors) was 45%. My kid would have loved to be in the regular Orgo Course instead, since they had only had AP Chem and nothing beyond it. They would have gotten an A, not a B and it would have been a lot let stress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

You know what else doesn't make sense? They are ok with admitting kids who have legacy advantage, paid tutors throughout high school, test prep, parents propping up a nonprofit or similar, high-priced college consultants, but once admitted you're on your own.

It’s an equity issue. The students with $$ can get outside tutoring etc but those who are low income cannot. That is why they have this policy in place.

Then it's up to the university to provide enough of the needed tutors for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

OMG---yes, that certainly would help trigger mental health issues! If outside tutoring is not allowed, then the university needs to provide 1-1 tutoring for anyone who needs it. And how is tutoring a "honor code violation". A tutor cannot take your midterm or finals for you. Entire point of college is to learn, so why shouldn't a kid be able to get the extra help they need to actually learn the material?

Anonymous wrote:My sister is nothing like a tiger parent---farthest thing from it. Her kids did not reach or attend the top 1-50 schools. They went to your typical solid in-state school with large admit rates. Her boys all seemed happy, athletic, very open and loving family. 2 of the 3 experienced serious mental health issues in college, 20 years old one, 21 the other one. One is in-treatment right now.

I am seeing this pattern among work colleague's kids, neighbors' kids, etc. There is definitely something going on and these weren't all 'stressed out type A kids' gunning for ivies. That's not the root cause.

So your nephews were in HS during Covid. That likely made their mental health issues worse/triggered them, along with social media/phone use. Think about it---those kids missed out on 2+ key years of "development"/maturing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised that no one is seeing the irony here. This is a story/thread about the tragic loss of bright young lives; there is clear data in the mental health literature that young adults are experiencing unprecedented levels of stress, lack social and emotional supports, are facing challenging job markets and economic uncertainties. All of these factors have been linked to poor mental health outcomes and increased risk of suicide (so is being young, male, in periods of life transition and a host of other factors). The posters in this thread are looking to blame a host of factors---these kids must be mentally ill! the universities are not taking care of them! it's grade deflation!--and discounting any suggestion that these kids and young adults are experiencing extraordinary amounts of pressure to achieve.

This forum is filled with parents agonizing over whether Junior should take the SAT a third or fourth time because they have not gotten a perfect score. Or asking about what classes middle schoolers need to take in order to get into a T20 school. Or slamming others achievements or school choices--your kid will never get a job or into grad school if they don't go to a T10 school. Or ridiculing kids for their academic interests--they will be unemployed if they don't get a STEM degree. Or their grades. Or piling on when someone doesn't get into a target school--they had no chance with grades like that!

The hyper demanding and hypercompetitive environment of modern parenting and the cruelly hypercritical nattering nabobs of social media is crushing the souls of these young people. These kids are living in a hell of their parents making and being forced to try to meet unrealistic standards.

Maybe it is time for folks to rethink what they are saying to posters who come asking for guidance or looking for help. Maybe offer more positive and supportive feedback. Maybe let your kids know that they have more value than an SAT score. I don't know. This whole thread is heartbreaking.

You are completely missing the main cause: social media/iphones (proven to cause a great deal of this mental illness) and microplastics and tainted food and water supplies.

This isn't a factor only seen with 'college' kids or UMC--the increase in serious mental health issues (30%) in adolescents starting happening right after the launch of iphones/SM. We now having babies/toddlers being wheeled around in strollers with their heads buried in mom's phone or an ipad.

IPhones and Social media definately contribute a lot to the mental health crisis. It shouldn't be "reality". Kids simply don't understand that nobody posts the Bad stuff on Social media, just the fun/exciting parts of their life they want to brag about. Even adults, rarely do we post "well I had a shitty day, and X, Y and Z happened and made it even shittier". We just post cute photos of our last vacation or us out for drinks with 10 of our besties (nobody really has 10 besties)

Covid did not help. I had a kid in 10th grade when covid hit. They did rest of 10th grade from their bed and all of 11th as well. 12th grade was fully in person, but they were masked.
So this means 1/2 of 10th and all of 11th, they were not forced to actually interact with other kids or teachers. Most teachers did not require cameras (because kids were having a difficult enough time with everything and heck they are teens). So my kid (along with most) missed out on the key social skills developments and maturity that would typically happen in 10th/11/12th grade. Sure my kid socialized with their own groups of friends (but even that, we are covid conscious so it was outside or masked.

Then they go off to college and have to figure out how to "meet people". They haven't done that for 3 years.

Now I don't regret keeping my kid at home during covid (heck, our schools didn't go back with some inperson until the last 8 weeks of 11th grade, and even then it was every other day to prevent over crowding and masks were still required. So my kid decided it was just easier to be on zoom at home---because the day you'd be in person, 30-70% of the class would still be on zoom, so it was really just zooming from a classroom in a mask, socialization wasn't really happening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a PP above said: most current students never speak of "loving" their time at Princeton. Princeton becomes more fun and memorable after they leave as evidenced by the re-unions. In fact the enthusiasm for the reunions gives me the impression of a group that has been through some "tough" social and academic trenches and now, on some level, realize the difficult experience didn't really matter in the grand scheme of life.

This is just nuts. Maybe you're a Princeton alum who didn't have a great experience. It happens, and some graduates are candid about it. Or maybe you're just conjuring it this theory for whatever reason.

But, overall, students who don't have a good experience at a school don't turn into loyal alumni. They collect their diplomas and move on.

In comparison, Princeton alumni go back (in large numbers for major reunions), wear ridiculous orange and black beer jackets, and revel in songs about "the best damn place of all." Not because it was college boot camp, but because they have good memories and want to return to campus. And there's a poster on this very thread speaking to what a great experience her son, a recent graduate, had there.

The recent student deaths are concerning. Most of the students were Asian, and Princeton reportedly has the second-highest percentage of Asian undergraduates among the Ivies. If they need to do something to better equip those students (and all entering students) to deal with setbacks once on campus, they should look for a way to do it. But you don't eliminate academic rigor simply because some students are used to only getting As their entire lives.

+1

My spouse went to Princeton and LOVED the the time there. They had to WORK and were constantly in the library, but it gave them a good work ethic and understanding that they won't always be #1 at everything, but to still work hard at it anyway.

We go back for reunions and some of our closest friends are spouse's friends from their time at Princeton. They are all great people doing interesting things and always willing to help or network you with someone if need be. They aren't all consultants and in finance. When I was back for an event recently and used any restroom, once you shut the door they had #s if you were assaulted or needed medical or mental health help.

I think part of the issue is that students are used to being #1 at their schools and MANY high schools are giving out As left and right to make parents happy and so that their students get into these top schools. When you go to a place like Princeton or Yale or Harvard or MIT, etc you won't be the smartest person in the room anymore. Some people can't handle that or are taught that from their parents.

I did not attend an Ivy, but attended a top university and another top university for graduate school. I had a not great childhood and learned about RESILIENCE. I learned that I needed to work hard. I also had an issue in undergrad for one semester. I spoke to my Dean and was able to get an extension and saw a therapist on campus every week. I had to ask for help and be the one to say, I am having these issues outside of school and need extra support because it is impacting my schoolwork and mental health. I had to advocate for myself, as an adult. I ended up being fine, but at some point you can't read someones mind, and you need to ask for help if you need it.

I also think social media has made things so much worse for kids. You can't make a mistake without someone recording it. You look online and see fancy vacations and happy lives even though 90% of that is fake. I am so grateful I did not grow up in the time of social media and all this fentanyl, but I worry for my kids and what life will look like for them.

Anonymous wrote:Princeton alumna here, graduated in the 1990s. It is great to be a Princeton alum, but being a student at Princeton is a mixed bag. I made great friends and it has helped my career at various points. But academically Princeton has been a really difficult place for at least 100 years.

Agree completely with this — also an alum from the 90s. I love Princeton more the further from graduation I get. Love my friends from that time. I did not love going there. Have complicated feelings about it. It’s harsh in certain ways, in part because the junior faculty are themselves gunning for permanent positions they mostly do not get.

Anonymous wrote:You would have other options besides the eating clubs, but you also appear not to realize how much the eating clubs have adapted to the school’s changing demographics.

This. The residential aspects of Princeton have changed a lot in recent decades. I am sure Alumni/ae will have varying views about the change, but overall it makes Princeton more interesting to us, as a reach school for our DC when their time comes.

Anonymous wrote:Fact is most stem courses are graded on a curve....so unless everyone is earning a 90%+ in the course, your grade will be determined by "the overall level of smarts in the course". Much easier to get an A/B+ in Organic Chemistry at a school where you are in the top 20% of students vs one where everyone is a striver/4.0+ mentality

This comment is dead on target. Further, at many schools non-STEM courses will curve to maybe a 3.3/4 median grade, while STEM courses will curve to a 3.0 median. Curving to 3.0 median means that about half the class is getting a B- or lower. This can be crushing to a student used to all As or a mix of As and Bs, especially if there if family pressure on GPA / grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

You know what else doesn't make sense? They are ok with admitting kids who have legacy advantage, paid tutors throughout high school, test prep, parents propping up a nonprofit or similar, high-priced college consultants, but once admitted you're on your own.

If you are a poor or URM kid who got in without a lot of advantages in life, I don't think you might fit in to the eating club culture at Princeton either.

You would have other options besides the eating clubs, but you also appear not to realize how much the eating clubs have adapted to the school’s changing demographics.

+1. My child is a low income student and is an officer at an eating club. It is an open sign up club (many are) with lots of diversity and a welcoming community. And the students seem to have a very good time based on pictures I’ve seen at social events.

It’s not the non-selective ones that some might have issue with. It’s the elitist eating clubs like Ivy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

You know what else doesn't make sense? They are ok with admitting kids who have legacy advantage, paid tutors throughout high school, test prep, parents propping up a nonprofit or similar, high-priced college consultants, but once admitted you're on your own.

If you are a poor or URM kid who got in without a lot of advantages in life, I don't think you might fit in to the eating club culture at Princeton either.

You would have other options besides the eating clubs, but you also appear not to realize how much the eating clubs have adapted to the school’s changing demographics.

+1. My child is a low income student and is an officer at an eating club. It is an open sign up club (many are) with lots of diversity and a welcoming community. And the students seem to have a very good time based on pictures I’ve seen at social events.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our youngest is at Princeton. It feels like there are far more rules and the administration is far less understanding and flexible compared to our oldest child's experience at another Ivy. For instance, Princeton students are forbidden from getting outside tutoring if they are having difficulty in a class (it is considered an honor code violation). The students are supposed to use the student tutors provided by the school, but there aren't nearly enough to go around. So a student having difficulties in a class who is unable to secure one of the few tutors is left to completely flounder or risk getting an honor code violation by seeking outside help. That doesn't make sense to me.

You know what else doesn't make sense? They are ok with admitting kids who have legacy advantage, paid tutors throughout high school, test prep, parents propping up a nonprofit or similar, high-priced college consultants, but once admitted you're on your own.

It’s an equity issue. The students with $$ can get outside tutoring etc but those who are low income cannot. That is why they have this policy in place.

Anonymous wrote:The only athletes I know of that attend(ed) Princeton wouldn’t have gotten in without their sport. The academic standards aren’t as high for athletes.

Same x 1000. Maybe it’s not the same for all sports but the students we know are women’s hockey players and nowhere near Ivy standards by any metric - test, grades, rigor, etc.