Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

OP here. It probably works for your family because your kids are wealthy white children who can only fail upwards. It is not true for students of color.

A very (very) wealthy Asian poster claiming oppression. Typical.

This is representative of Challenge Success’s rampant anti-Asian racism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

OP here. It probably works for your family because your kids are wealthy white children who can only fail upwards. It is not true for students of color.

A very (very) wealthy Asian poster claiming oppression. Typical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

OP here. It probably works for your family because your kids are wealthy white children who can only fail upwards. It is not true for students of color.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

OP here. It probably works for your family because your kids are wealthy white children who can only fail upwards. It is not true for students of color.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

OP here. It probably works for your family because your kids are wealthy white children who can only fail upwards. It is not true for students of color.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Interesting. My kid went to one of the schools you mention and I somehow am on the Challenge Success mailing list.

I have a similar philosophy to CS. My kids have been very successful and are happy and well adjusted.

Different philosophies may work for different families. It may work for you and your children to push them and offer them no autonomy. That is not my style and would not work in our family. Both of our kids can be successful. Personally, I feel my kids will be ahead on emotional intelligence and life skills by becoming self motivated and making their own decisions, but I’m sure you feel differently. I guess that’s why we each get to raise our own kids our way.

Anonymous wrote:Your kid isn’t learning “grit” by being in a cloistered setting their whole life. Sports & a part-time job in high school would be better at teaching that than taking a boatload of AP classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to spend the rest of the day wondering if a false fallacy is a truth.

This is the comment I was looking for.

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Anonymous wrote:

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!

OP here. Totally agree. I brought up the point about merit aid to Dr. Levine and Dr. Pope, and they were very dismissive about it. The whole group in general is pretty oblivious, and any “research” they bring up should quickly be ignored.

But maybe that philosophy applies to you if you’re a multi-millionaire from a white family in Marin, Atherton, Palo Alto, or Los Altos who sends their kids to Castijella (where IIRC Dr. Pope was a trustee of) or Branson or College Prep or Head Royce or Lick Wilmerding or Crystal Springs or or or… deluded bubble, and I shake my head at their lassiez faire philosophy. And FWIW I sent my kids to one of these schools when I used to live in the Bay.

Anonymous wrote:I am going to spend the rest of the day wondering if a false fallacy is a truth.

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’re going to be in for a surprise when you realize your kids can make any choices they want from 18-25.