These families could have had more and better success had they taken another route. We're not talking about families who do nothing for their children. We're talking about families that have spent a lot of time and money on test prep in hopes of a particular outcome, but have fallen short. Had they spent that time and money (and in many cases, much less money) in a different way, they could have had a much better result. Their kids could have had a much broader and varied education and ended up as better candidates for college by having a variety of experiences.

Anonymous wrote:

The ones who spent all the time and money on test prep who came up short of their hopes. Those families may very well have been better off broadening their children's exposure to a variety of extracurriculars, including, but certainly not limited to sports. In fact, sports was not even mentioned in the post that was partially quoted.

Kids who spend time on academics and a mix of other activities have many, many advantages over kids who spend very little time on anything other than academics. Leadership, organizational skills, persistence, determination, hard work, interpersonal skills: only a few of the areas of growth for kids who explore interests in non-academic areas in their after school time. They develop traits that will benefit them for their entire lives and can make lasting friendships at the same time. As an extra benefit, they become better candidates for college admission. A win-win all around.

What about the control group of families with similar desires who do not spend time and money and still come up short of their hopes. I wonder if they are not worse off for not even trying. Oh, those regrets can haunt one. If only I'd given it a shot...what may have been!

For some it's better to have tried and failed than not to have tried at all. Which failure is worse?

Anonymous wrote:

The ones who spent all the time and money on test prep who came up short of their hopes. Those families may very well have been better off broadening their children's exposure to a variety of extracurriculars, including, but certainly not limited to sports. In fact, sports was not even mentioned in the post that was partially quoted.

Kids who spend time on academics and a mix of other activities have many, many advantages over kids who spend very little time on anything other than academics. Leadership, organizational skills, persistence, determination, hard work, interpersonal skills: only a few of the areas of growth for kids who explore interests in non-academic areas in their after school time. They develop traits that will benefit them for their entire lives and can make lasting friendships at the same time. As an extra benefit, they become better candidates for college admission. A win-win all around.

What about the control group of families with similar desires who do not spend time and money and still come up short of their hopes. I wonder if they are not worse off for not even trying. Oh, those regrets can haunt one. If only I'd given it a shot...what may have been!

For some it's better to have tried and failed than not to have tried at all. Which failure is worse?

The ones who spent all the time and money on test prep who came up short of their hopes. Those families may very well have been better off broadening their children's exposure to a variety of extracurriculars, including, but certainly not limited to sports. In fact, sports was not even mentioned in the post that was partially quoted.

Kids who spend time on academics and a mix of other activities have many, many advantages over kids who spend very little time on anything other than academics. Leadership, organizational skills, persistence, determination, hard work, interpersonal skills: only a few of the areas of growth for kids who explore interests in non-academic areas in their after school time. They develop traits that will benefit them for their entire lives and can make lasting friendships at the same time. As an extra benefit, they become better candidates for college admission. A win-win all around.

Anonymous wrote:

And if these parents had spent the same amount of time and money, or even less, on an extracurricular activity their children loved, these kids would actually be much better off, both as young people growing into adulthood and as college applicants.

They do. Have you ever stopped to consider the billions of dollars American families spend on year-round club sports activities and summer camps in NOVA and the DC area? Billions of dollars on sports/games. I suspect more spent on club sports, equipment, tournaments than on test-prep. Tell us how better off our kids are for sports and not academics? I think the capitalization/ industrialization of sports for children has in fact ruined sports. When I grew up we all played a variety of sports and simply went to the playgrounds after school and homework to create. This avenue is all but gone today.

What does that make the kids of pressuring parents like you who spend their childhood reaching for your bar and come up short? Where are the pictures on the prep school sites of the kids who invested hours doing their best but didn't get into TJ? What do their parents think, now that they face a life track no better than your average AP kid? Disappointment? Shame? Would you grace them with your title of "loser"?

Anonymous wrote:

And if these parents had spent the same amount of time and money, or even less, on an extracurricular activity their children loved, these kids would actually be much better off, both as young people growing into adulthood and as college applicants.

They do. Have you ever stopped to consider the billions of dollars American families spend on year-round club sports activities and summer camps in NOVA and the DC area? Billions of dollars on sports/games. I suspect more spent on club sports, equipment, tournaments than on test-prep. Tell us how better off our kids are for sports and not academics? I think the capitalization/ industrialization of sports for children has in fact ruined sports. When I grew up we all played a variety of sports and simply went to the playgrounds after school and homework to create. This avenue is all but gone today.

And if these parents had spent the same amount of time and money, or even less, on an extracurricular activity their children loved, these kids would actually be much better off, both as young people growing into adulthood and as college applicants.

Someone just astutely remarked: "Empty barrels make the most noise".

Some don't like it when others, by dint of hard work and preparation, move through AAP, TJ, and HYPMS.

What does that make the kids of pressuring parents like you who spend their childhood reaching for your bar and come up short? Where are the pictures on the prep school sites of the kids who invested hours doing their best but didn't get into TJ? What do their parents think, now that they face a life track no better than your average AP kid? Disappointment? Shame? Would you grace them with your title of "loser"?

Here is why you are wrong: What HS in FCPS has the best teachers? IDK, but it is NOT TJ. TJ has the best students, but many of those student would learn more with the better teachers in the base school

At MIT, Caltech, Harvard, Yale, etc, do you think the Professors are paid to teach? No. They are judged by there success in research: getting grants and publications. They care about there grad students (who actually teach the classes) more than the undergrads.

Do you know why people chose which university to work at as professors? When they are looking for work (after finishing up the PhD/PostDoc), they go to the university with openings. HYP/MIT etc get good people -- amongst the best; but so do UVA, VA Tech, W & M, GMU, JMU. There are not a lot of jobs in academia. The difference is the people at W & M, JMU, etc are judged based on the teaching ability, rather than the research proliferation. So, your child will have better teaching at the lesser schools. In addition, there are research opportunities for undergrads at the lesser schools. However, the peers will be better at the top schools.

If your kid is the type that is self motivated and does not require competition, they may do better at a the second tier schools. If there excellence is 100% the result of competition, then you want the best competition.

Personally, I am a research scientist. I pursue the great truths; my work is world renowned, but I am not that competitive; I am more concerned with the work being correct than who gets credit. (I was offered a CTO position, but turned it down).