Anonymous wrote:DC is in 8th and thinking ahead to high school with applications coming up. Has all As and high scores. Setting aside the question of whether they have a chance of getting in we would like to hear from some parents who have a child who went to a STEM magnet program at places like Blair, Wheaton, Poolesville.
How did you or your child make your decision and why? How did it go? Did your child find the classes too challenging? Are you happy your child went? Any regrets?
Anonymous wrote:If you have a bright, curious kid who has the stamina for compressed science classes and is creative and expressive, you are golden. Blair has space for kids who are intelligent and curious but not necessarily want to take all of the most advanced math/science/comp sci classes. I have seen this. There are some classes that will seem tedious if the kids are not into it -- even STEM kids who like just one particular branch of science (e.g. Bio. ) may not care for most advanced branch of another science (e.g., math or physics). But, the key is to be curious, intelligent, and have stamina (quick processing). The magnet teachers are a treasure (for the most part) and seem to make the subjects come alive!
If your non-STEM kid gets into a STEM-magnet (assuming the stats are there), the kid should go in with an open mind. Investigate the upper-level magnet courses and see if any of those topics spark joy. If not, pass. You will simply be putting a square peg in a round hole.
Anonymous wrote:My DS used to always apply to all the magnets he was eligible for in MS and HS and got into them. At heart he is a kid who loves writing, literature, politics, history, sociology, However, Science is also not hard and his buddies all chose STEM.
Now in college, he is doing double major in CS and Sociology. And again, he has tons of time to play video games too.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I'm not sure my child would know if they "enjoy" science at this age because the MCPS science curriculum is not very strong in elementary and MS.
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:God, I was that kid and went to Stuyvesant in NYC. So painfully boring. I could keep up—barely—but it was so hard because I just wasn’t interested in all the STEM requirements. All the electives were STEM related for the most part.
I ran to a college with no distribution requirements and haven’t touched physics since.
But, I bet college was a breeze for you after Stuyvesant!
Is that a goal?
How did the goalpost change from avoiding boredom and forcing challenge at all cost (which is what I hear from a lot of parents in K-12) to “I want them to be bored and coast in college!”?
Uhmm...I'd rather them not have a mental health crisis away from a trusted support network at college all in the name of "challenge"! I want them to have a balanced college life without sacrificing their future professional goals.
Which is more than achieveable from a normal public school and not a STEM high school
Anonymous wrote:Can the kid withdraw from the program if they find it too challenging?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:God, I was that kid and went to Stuyvesant in NYC. So painfully boring. I could keep up—barely—but it was so hard because I just wasn’t interested in all the STEM requirements. All the electives were STEM related for the most part.
I ran to a college with no distribution requirements and haven’t touched physics since.
But, I bet college was a breeze for you after Stuyvesant!
Is that a goal?
How did the goalpost change from avoiding boredom and forcing challenge at all cost (which is what I hear from a lot of parents in K-12) to “I want them to be bored and coast in college!”?
Uhmm...I'd rather them not have a mental health crisis away from a trusted support network at college all in the name of "challenge"! I want them to have a balanced college life without sacrificing their future professional goals.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:God, I was that kid and went to Stuyvesant in NYC. So painfully boring. I could keep up—barely—but it was so hard because I just wasn’t interested in all the STEM requirements. All the electives were STEM related for the most part.
I ran to a college with no distribution requirements and haven’t touched physics since.
But, I bet college was a breeze for you after Stuyvesant!
Is that a goal?
How did the goalpost change from avoiding boredom and forcing challenge at all cost (which is what I hear from a lot of parents in K-12) to “I want them to be bored and coast in college!”?