Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You left out the very important precursor: "You don't want to hear this, and probably cannot process it at this stage, but it is far better for her to develop a strong social sense of self, have fun and friendships, and feel in control of her own life than is is to go to any particular college." Those are they very things she's developing now by not focusing all her energy on getting into Harvard to please somebody else.

I don't think the poster was saying UMD would make the child less depressed than Harvard per se. It's the path to Harvard and the expectation to get into Harvard at the expense of self.So saying the depressed Harvard student would be depressed (or as depressed) at UMD isn't fair because the future college student is developing her sense of self and attending to her current and future mental health by not putting all effort and hope for her future on Harvard.

Agency is a big deal for teens. Have you looked into the work of Madeline Levine? https://madelinelevine.com/books/the-price-of-privilege/

I was just going to reference this book. She came an spoke in McLean years ago and it was so impactful on how we decided to parent around academics and acheivement.

OP here. I briefly worked with Challenge Success a couple of years ago (I used to live in the Bay Area and they’re fairly prominent in the private school scene there). I know Dr. Levine and her colleague (Denise Pope) personally, and am familiar with most of the Challenge Success team. I very much dislike them.

They are the epitome of white privilege and mainly preach to wealthy, white families with the means to send their kids to any college. Here is a sampling of the absurdities I heard from that group when I worked with them:

1. Dr. Levine was giving a talk about how students’ goals were becoming more and more materialistic and less in touch with their “truly desires and goals.” She pointed to a survey that asked college students in the 80s what their goals out of college were, and the majority back then said “developing an inner philosophy and my love of learning.” A similar survey in 2015 allegedly pointed out that the majority of college students nowadays are most concerned with “making as much money as possible after graduation.” The rest of the Challenge Success team nodded in agreement that students are too focused on brand name prestige and high-paying careers in tech or finance or medicine. When I (gently) pointed out that this might be because of the ballooning student debt crisis between the 80s and now, and that students are probably most concerned with whether their college degree is giving them a high ROI due to the prospect of paying off their student loans, buying a house (increasingly expensive), and starting a family (also increasingly expensive), my concerns were quickly dismissed. It is obvious that Dr. Levine lives in a bubble of immense privilege, which makes sense because IIRC her therapy practice basically only treated wealthy Marin residents.

2. I was watching a talk with Dr. Levine at my kids’ school, and her example of having her own kids “take agency over their own education” was to… have her two sons take out loans for their final year of law school. This struck me as an absurd example since most law students finance law school on their own anyways (so having her sons take out loans for their final year is not a particularly compelling example of agency), and law school debt can be pretty destructive for many recent grads. Places like Columbia Law run $100k/year, and I don’t think having even $100k in loans after graduation is a particularly effectual example of agency.

3. The Challenge Success board is mostly wealthy white women who married rich tech execs and doctors in the SF Bay Area and then proceed to extol the virtues of free-range parenting. They are rampantly anti-Asian, and behind closed doors, I know several members who have commented some version of “the poor Asian kids are pushed and prodded to the extent of their creativity, sense of self, and confidence, allegedly causing mental health issues.” One person on the exec board went as far as to say that TJ (one of their partner schools) was a “sad, sad place.” When I pointed out that this was a racist trope based off of the “robotic Asian tiger cub” stereotype, I just got a blank look and a shrug… Perhaps the fact that I’m an Asian woman myself led to that response?

4. Her misguided focus on giving kids agency is mostly a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Kids do not need agency, especially if they’re from middle class or working class families. They need guidance, support, mentorship, and information on how to achieve upward mobility. And that’s through putting your kids in the most rigorous environments possible. Giving them choices robs them of important opportunities, and teenagers are not equipped to make good choices anyways — their brains don’t develop until they’re 25.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You left out the very important precursor: "You don't want to hear this, and probably cannot process it at this stage, but it is far better for her to develop a strong social sense of self, have fun and friendships, and feel in control of her own life than is is to go to any particular college." Those are they very things she's developing now by not focusing all her energy on getting into Harvard to please somebody else.

I don't think the poster was saying UMD would make the child less depressed than Harvard per se. It's the path to Harvard and the expectation to get into Harvard at the expense of self.So saying the depressed Harvard student would be depressed (or as depressed) at UMD isn't fair because the future college student is developing her sense of self and attending to her current and future mental health by not putting all effort and hope for her future on Harvard.

Agency is a big deal for teens. Have you looked into the work of Madeline Levine? https://madelinelevine.com/books/the-price-of-privilege/

I was just going to reference this book. She came an spoke in McLean years ago and it was so impactful on how we decided to parent around academics and acheivement.

I love how you're SO offended by any sort of anti-Asian remarks, but you have no issue with being racist toward white people. What a hypocrite.

OP here. I briefly worked with Challenge Success a couple of years ago (I used to live in the Bay Area and they’re fairly prominent in the private school scene there). I know Dr. Levine and her colleague (Denise Pope) personally, and am familiar with most of the Challenge Success team. I very much dislike them.

They are the epitome of white privilege and mainly preach to wealthy, white families with the means to send their kids to any college. Here is a sampling of the absurdities I heard from that group when I worked with them:

1. Dr. Levine was giving a talk about how students’ goals were becoming more and more materialistic and less in touch with their “truly desires and goals.” She pointed to a survey that asked college students in the 80s what their goals out of college were, and the majority back then said “developing an inner philosophy and my love of learning.” A similar survey in 2015 allegedly pointed out that the majority of college students nowadays are most concerned with “making as much money as possible after graduation.” The rest of the Challenge Success team nodded in agreement that students are too focused on brand name prestige and high-paying careers in tech or finance or medicine. When I (gently) pointed out that this might be because of the ballooning student debt crisis between the 80s and now, and that students are probably most concerned with whether their college degree is giving them a high ROI due to the prospect of paying off their student loans, buying a house (increasingly expensive), and starting a family (also increasingly expensive), my concerns were quickly dismissed. It is obvious that Dr. Levine lives in a bubble of immense privilege, which makes sense because IIRC her therapy practice basically only treated wealthy Marin residents.

2. I was watching a talk with Dr. Levine at my kids’ school, and her example of having her own kids “take agency over their own education” was to… have her two sons take out loans for their final year of law school. This struck me as an absurd example since most law students finance law school on their own anyways (so having her sons take out loans for their final year is not a particularly compelling example of agency), and law school debt can be pretty destructive for many recent grads. Places like Columbia Law run $100k/year, and I don’t think having even $100k in loans after graduation is a particularly effectual example of agency.

3. The Challenge Success board is mostly wealthy white women who married rich tech execs and doctors in the SF Bay Area and then proceed to extol the virtues of free-range parenting. They are rampantly anti-Asian, and behind closed doors, I know several members who have commented some version of “the poor Asian kids are pushed and prodded to the extent of their creativity, sense of self, and confidence, allegedly causing mental health issues.” One person on the exec board went as far as to say that TJ (one of their partner schools) was a “sad, sad place.” When I pointed out that this was a racist trope based off of the “robotic Asian tiger cub” stereotype, I just got a blank look and a shrug… Perhaps the fact that I’m an Asian woman myself led to that response?

4. Her misguided focus on giving kids agency is mostly a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Kids do not need agency, especially if they’re from middle class or working class families. They need guidance, support, mentorship, and information on how to achieve upward mobility. And that’s through putting your kids in the most rigorous environments possible. Giving them choices robs them of important opportunities, and teenagers are not equipped to make good choices anyways — their brains don’t develop until they’re 25.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I’d rather have a happy kid at UMD than a miserable one at Harvard”

This is like saying I'd rather be a happy peasant than a miserable king; I'd rather be a happy pig than a mad genius like Van Gogh, or Newton.

Sounds romantic - but no.

Congrats, you win for dumbest analogy of the day.

PP should explain why it's the dumbest analogy. Otherwise, s/he is talking nonsense.

DP here,

Because the difference between UMD graduate and Harvard graduate is tiny, and nothing like the difference between a king and a peasant or between a pig and a human genius.

Lol. That's like saying the difference between a DC government peasant and a king is tiny. Get real.

UMD CS >> Harvard English

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I’d rather have a happy kid at UMD than a miserable one at Harvard”

This is like saying I'd rather be a happy peasant than a miserable king; I'd rather be a happy pig than a mad genius like Van Gogh, or Newton.

Sounds romantic - but no.

Congrats, you win for dumbest analogy of the day.

PP should explain why it's the dumbest analogy. Otherwise, s/he is talking nonsense.

DP here,

Because the difference between UMD graduate and Harvard graduate is tiny, and nothing like the difference between a king and a peasant or between a pig and a human genius.

Lol. That's like saying the difference between a DC government peasant and a king is tiny. Get real.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I’d rather have a happy kid at UMD than a miserable one at Harvard”

This is like saying I'd rather be a happy peasant than a miserable king; I'd rather be a happy pig than a mad genius like Van Gogh, or Newton.

Sounds romantic - but no.

Congrats, you win for dumbest analogy of the day.

PP should explain why it's the dumbest analogy. Otherwise, s/he is talking nonsense.

DP here,

Because the difference between UMD graduate and Harvard graduate is tiny, and nothing like the difference between a king and a peasant or between a pig and a human genius.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You left out the very important precursor: "You don't want to hear this, and probably cannot process it at this stage, but it is far better for her to develop a strong social sense of self, have fun and friendships, and feel in control of her own life than is is to go to any particular college." Those are they very things she's developing now by not focusing all her energy on getting into Harvard to please somebody else.

I don't think the poster was saying UMD would make the child less depressed than Harvard per se. It's the path to Harvard and the expectation to get into Harvard at the expense of self.So saying the depressed Harvard student would be depressed (or as depressed) at UMD isn't fair because the future college student is developing her sense of self and attending to her current and future mental health by not putting all effort and hope for her future on Harvard.

Agency is a big deal for teens. Have you looked into the work of Madeline Levine? https://madelinelevine.com/books/the-price-of-privilege/

I was just going to reference this book. She came an spoke in McLean years ago and it was so impactful on how we decided to parent around academics and acheivement.

OP here. I briefly worked with Challenge Success a couple of years ago (I used to live in the Bay Area and they’re fairly prominent in the private school scene there). I know Dr. Levine and her colleague (Denise Pope) personally, and am familiar with most of the Challenge Success team. I very much dislike them.

They are the epitome of white privilege and mainly preach to wealthy, white families with the means to send their kids to any college. Here is a sampling of the absurdities I heard from that group when I worked with them:

1. Dr. Levine was giving a talk about how students’ goals were becoming more and more materialistic and less in touch with their “truly desires and goals.” She pointed to a survey that asked college students in the 80s what their goals out of college were, and the majority back then said “developing an inner philosophy and my love of learning.” A similar survey in 2015 allegedly pointed out that the majority of college students nowadays are most concerned with “making as much money as possible after graduation.” The rest of the Challenge Success team nodded in agreement that students are too focused on brand name prestige and high-paying careers in tech or finance or medicine. When I (gently) pointed out that this might be because of the ballooning student debt crisis between the 80s and now, and that students are probably most concerned with whether their college degree is giving them a high ROI due to the prospect of paying off their student loans, buying a house (increasingly expensive), and starting a family (also increasingly expensive), my concerns were quickly dismissed. It is obvious that Dr. Levine lives in a bubble of immense privilege, which makes sense because IIRC her therapy practice basically only treated wealthy Marin residents.

2. I was watching a talk with Dr. Levine at my kids’ school, and her example of having her own kids “take agency over their own education” was to… have her two sons take out loans for their final year of law school. This struck me as an absurd example since most law students finance law school on their own anyways (so having her sons take out loans for their final year is not a particularly compelling example of agency), and law school debt can be pretty destructive for many recent grads. Places like Columbia Law run $100k/year, and I don’t think having even $100k in loans after graduation is a particularly effectual example of agency.

3. The Challenge Success board is mostly wealthy white women who married rich tech execs and doctors in the SF Bay Area and then proceed to extol the virtues of free-range parenting. They are rampantly anti-Asian, and behind closed doors, I know several members who have commented some version of “the poor Asian kids are pushed and prodded to the extent of their creativity, sense of self, and confidence, allegedly causing mental health issues.” One person on the exec board went as far as to say that TJ (one of their partner schools) was a “sad, sad place.” When I pointed out that this was a racist trope based off of the “robotic Asian tiger cub” stereotype, I just got a blank look and a shrug… Perhaps the fact that I’m an Asian woman myself led to that response?

4. Her misguided focus on giving kids agency is mostly a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Kids do not need agency, especially if they’re from middle class or working class families. They need guidance, support, mentorship, and information on how to achieve upward mobility. And that’s through putting your kids in the most rigorous environments possible. Giving them choices robs them of important opportunities, and teenagers are not equipped to make good choices anyways — their brains don’t develop until they’re 25.

I think you make a lot of good points.

I get so frustrated by mommy blog type articles that talk about just being laid back about college admissions and high school performance. If you can afford to pay 80k per year for college, there are tons of decent places your kids can go. But the reality is higher SAT scores and higher grades can directly translate into TENS of thousand in merit aid per year! It’s so tra la la to encourage people to be laid back about high school academic success. Many kids NEED merit aid to afford college.

And also good point about kids wanting to choose majors where they can get a job!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You left out the very important precursor: "You don't want to hear this, and probably cannot process it at this stage, but it is far better for her to develop a strong social sense of self, have fun and friendships, and feel in control of her own life than is is to go to any particular college." Those are they very things she's developing now by not focusing all her energy on getting into Harvard to please somebody else.

I don't think the poster was saying UMD would make the child less depressed than Harvard per se. It's the path to Harvard and the expectation to get into Harvard at the expense of self.So saying the depressed Harvard student would be depressed (or as depressed) at UMD isn't fair because the future college student is developing her sense of self and attending to her current and future mental health by not putting all effort and hope for her future on Harvard.

Agency is a big deal for teens. Have you looked into the work of Madeline Levine? https://madelinelevine.com/books/the-price-of-privilege/

I was just going to reference this book. She came an spoke in McLean years ago and it was so impactful on how we decided to parent around academics and acheivement.

OP here. I briefly worked with Challenge Success a couple of years ago (I used to live in the Bay Area and they’re fairly prominent in the private school scene there). I know Dr. Levine and her colleague (Denise Pope) personally, and am familiar with most of the Challenge Success team. I very much dislike them.

They are the epitome of white privilege and mainly preach to wealthy, white families with the means to send their kids to any college. Here is a sampling of the absurdities I heard from that group when I worked with them:

1. Dr. Levine was giving a talk about how students’ goals were becoming more and more materialistic and less in touch with their “truly desires and goals.” She pointed to a survey that asked college students in the 80s what their goals out of college were, and the majority back then said “developing an inner philosophy and my love of learning.” A similar survey in 2015 allegedly pointed out that the majority of college students nowadays are most concerned with “making as much money as possible after graduation.” The rest of the Challenge Success team nodded in agreement that students are too focused on brand name prestige and high-paying careers in tech or finance or medicine. When I (gently) pointed out that this might be because of the ballooning student debt crisis between the 80s and now, and that students are probably most concerned with whether their college degree is giving them a high ROI due to the prospect of paying off their student loans, buying a house (increasingly expensive), and starting a family (also increasingly expensive), my concerns were quickly dismissed. It is obvious that Dr. Levine lives in a bubble of immense privilege, which makes sense because IIRC her therapy practice basically only treated wealthy Marin residents.

2. I was watching a talk with Dr. Levine at my kids’ school, and her example of having her own kids “take agency over their own education” was to… have her two sons take out loans for their final year of law school. This struck me as an absurd example since most law students finance law school on their own anyways (so having her sons take out loans for their final year is not a particularly compelling example of agency), and law school debt can be pretty destructive for many recent grads. Places like Columbia Law run $100k/year, and I don’t think having even $100k in loans after graduation is a particularly effectual example of agency.

3. The Challenge Success board is mostly wealthy white women who married rich tech execs and doctors in the SF Bay Area and then proceed to extol the virtues of free-range parenting. They are rampantly anti-Asian, and behind closed doors, I know several members who have commented some version of “the poor Asian kids are pushed and prodded to the extent of their creativity, sense of self, and confidence, allegedly causing mental health issues.” One person on the exec board went as far as to say that TJ (one of their partner schools) was a “sad, sad place.” When I pointed out that this was a racist trope based off of the “robotic Asian tiger cub” stereotype, I just got a blank look and a shrug… Perhaps the fact that I’m an Asian woman myself led to that response?

4. Her misguided focus on giving kids agency is mostly a privilege reserved for the wealthy. Kids do not need agency, especially if they’re from middle class or working class families. They need guidance, support, mentorship, and information on how to achieve upward mobility. And that’s through putting your kids in the most rigorous environments possible. Giving them choices robs them of important opportunities, and teenagers are not equipped to make good choices anyways — their brains don’t develop until they’re 25.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I’d rather have a happy kid at UMD than a miserable one at Harvard”

This is like saying I'd rather be a happy peasant than a miserable king; I'd rather be a happy pig than a mad genius like Van Gogh, or Newton.

Sounds romantic - but no.

Congrats, you win for dumbest analogy of the day.

PP should explain why it's the dumbest analogy. Otherwise, s/he is talking nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I’d rather have a happy kid at UMD than a miserable one at Harvard”

This is like saying I'd rather be a happy peasant than a miserable king; I'd rather be a happy pig than a mad genius like Van Gogh, or Newton.

Sounds romantic - but no.

Congrats, you win for dumbest analogy of the day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You left out the very important precursor: "You don't want to hear this, and probably cannot process it at this stage, but it is far better for her to develop a strong social sense of self, have fun and friendships, and feel in control of her own life than is is to go to any particular college." Those are they very things she's developing now by not focusing all her energy on getting into Harvard to please somebody else.

I don't think the poster was saying UMD would make the child less depressed than Harvard per se. It's the path to Harvard and the expectation to get into Harvard at the expense of self.So saying the depressed Harvard student would be depressed (or as depressed) at UMD isn't fair because the future college student is developing her sense of self and attending to her current and future mental health by not putting all effort and hope for her future on Harvard.

Agency is a big deal for teens. Have you looked into the work of Madeline Levine? https://madelinelevine.com/books/the-price-of-privilege/

I was just going to reference this book. She came an spoke in McLean years ago and it was so impactful on how we decided to parent around academics and acheivement.

Anonymous wrote:
1. I agree entirely.

2. The Ivy League troll is still active and their stories are false: it's always a disappointed parent with a child at an Ivy who is either miserable and depressed, or about to drop out. Please report them to Jeff.

3. The "hothoused child" who has been built from scratch by Tiger Parents is a myth that needs to die. It is not possible to do that without the child's buy-in. Any child would rebel! The children who are intelligent and functional enough to go to an Ivy, and are prepared by their parents to that end, usually do very well there! BECAUSE they're prepared. My husband tends to be an Asian Tiger Parent, and we know many Asian Tiger Parents. The children are all well-adjusted and ready for any college.

4. The only person who ever told me that the Ivy League wasn't worth it was a middle-aged Indian-American first gen who felt discriminated against at Harvard during her student days there - she said she was made to feel less than the wealthy white Americans who referenced a world she was not part of. I listened politely, but as a multi-racial person who has lived in several countries, in sometimes rather snobby and xenophobic ones, I thought that this should not stop non-whites from applying... quite the contrary!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absolutely false. When a parent withholds love from a child early on and only grants it when the child is achieving, the child will do anything for the love. Period. To assume they would rebel is naive.

By the time they are an adult, they will feel resentment.

+1. I know lots of my peers have lots of issues with their overbearing parents but don't have the energy or boldness to confront them.

-1

OP here. I’ve never met these poor tortured tiger cubs you’re mentioning. I was pushed, and so were most of my high school friends, by immigrant tiger parents. We are grateful. None of us are resentful. You’re making up a figure in your mind.

NP here. OP - you are coming at this from your experience. Maybe your social circle really are all happy. Or maybe some of you friends are really good at hiding their thoughts from you, or themselves even. But I’m a high school teacher in a magnet program and see a whole lot more kids than you, and I can assure you that not everyone belongs or is thriving in the magnet environment and they are very conflicted about college and the major that has been chosen for them by their parents. Every year out of ~100 11th graders I have 2-3 of them literally crying in my office over not earning a perfect 4.0 due to my class. It doesn’t take long for the rest of the stress story to come out. Other teachers relate similar experiences. I’d estimate 10-15% of the magnet kids are truly unhappy due to being pushed too hard (not including the general 50% of them who are pretty stressed with high workload.) On the adult side, in our department of 15 there are 2 teachers who were career changers who switched to teaching after a few years because they didn’t like the field chosen by their tiger parents and didn’t enjoy their elite college experience.

Your experience is not the same as everyone’s OP. I agree with the nuanced premise from the other post (big fish, small pond is equally successful and less stressed/happier).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP why aren’t you wealthy enough after working at those unicorn companies & going to top schools to not have to worry about this nonsense. Perhaps it wasn’t worth it?

OP here. I do work at a unicorn. I still want my kids to have a rock solid work ethic and experience with high-pressure, intense, and stressful environments.

What’s the point if you don’t get to enjoy the money?

You do get to enjoy it. But you need to develop a solid work ethic and an appreciation for sacrifice first.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP why aren’t you wealthy enough after working at those unicorn companies & going to top schools to not have to worry about this nonsense. Perhaps it wasn’t worth it?

OP here. I do work at a unicorn. I still want my kids to have a rock solid work ethic and experience with high-pressure, intense, and stressful environments.

What’s the point if you don’t get to enjoy the money?