Anonymous wrote:Where your kid goes to college isn't as important to their long-term character, happiness and life goals as being in a healthy environment from K-8 or K-12.

If you provide that, you win! No need to chase college as some kind of affirmation badge. Studies show where you went to school (intellectual and socio-emotional growth and peer influence) between K-8 and K-12 matter much more to the foundation of the person your kid will become.

College is just a short 4 year pit stop. The 9-14 years between K-8 or K-12 are much more important in terms of quality of school and peer group.

I have 4 kids aged between 16 - 2. And lots of close friends with kids between 14 - 35. My mother and sister in law are both child psychologists too.

Anonymous wrote:Where your kid goes to college isn't as important to their long-term character, happiness and life goals as being in a healthy environment from K-8 or K-12.

If you provide that, you win! No need to chase college as some kind of affirmation badge. Studies show where you went to school (intellectual and socio-emotional growth and peer influence) between K-8 and K-12 matter much more to the foundation of the person your kid will become.

College is just a short 4 year pit stop. The 9-14 years between K-8 or K-12 are much more important in terms of quality of school and peer group.

I have 4 kids aged between 16 - 2. And lots of close friends with kids between 14 - 35. My mother and sister in law are both child psychologists too.

Anonymous wrote:Where your kid goes to college isn't as important to their long-term character, happiness and life goals as being in a healthy environment from K-8 or K-12.

If you provide that, you win! No need to chase college as some kind of affirmation badge. Studies show where you went to school (intellectual and socio-emotional growth and peer influence) between K-8 and K-12 matter much more to the foundation of the person your kid will become.

College is just a short 4 year pit stop. The 9-14 years between K-8 or K-12 are much more important in terms of quality of school and peer group.

I have 4 kids aged between 16 - 2. And lots of close friends with kids between 14 - 35. My mother and sister in law are both child psychologists too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to an admitted events day at a HYPSM. A parent was asking the tour guide (a senior student at the university) how difficult it is to get an A, if the professors provide study guides, if the seniors help with past exam questions, etc. as her child is "an average kid, not the brightest but not very bad either". That child was admitted to 4 of HYPSM's - except MIT.

This parent was asking specific questions about two subjects that are supposed to be difficult. The level of detail at the university the child is merely considering, the contents of the syllabus in one subject, etc was just shocking.

Anonymous wrote:I went to an admitted events day at a HYPSM. A parent was asking the tour guide (a senior student at the university) how difficult it is to get an A, if the professors provide study guides, if the seniors help with past exam questions, etc. as her child is "an average kid, not the brightest but not very bad either". That child was admitted to 4 of HYPSM's - except MIT.

Anonymous wrote:What I’ve learned is that so, so many kids (and their parents) just want to go to the “best school” they get into, without much regard what seems like little regard for which school that is. So they strategize about how to get into any good school — see all the posts here about ED strategy and so much gaming (which major, summer programs, etc).

I think this contributes to some strong kids aiming super high for ED, not out of love for the school but love for the prestige, and with all the games they can. This approach is great for them, but sucks for everyone else who has a different approach (like a kid who doesn’t want to pick one school in October, likes the idea of choices, or isn’t interested in playing games to get into any “best ” school just to be there).

My observation (based on several years of observation at a private school, so generally know the kids) is that strong but likely not tippy top kids get into super reach schools and some stronger kids, well, don’t. Yes, I know that every kid is unique and has something to offer. I’m mostly frustrated by schools that say you need “best grades” with “top rigor” but then admit kids who don’t have that in ED and reject kids who DO have that in EA and RD.

The process sucks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Realize some parents pretend to have no real help and, in reality, have multiple counselors helping their kids with the application process.

Ex. I'm on AN, and there's a prolific mom/participant, with multiple HYPSM kids (including the most recent senior). Then you see the mom's name pop up in an email from a 3rd party national college counseling firm, for a presentation about passion projects or something. So, you realize this mom has been actively using a pricey multi-year national firm for these kids to precisely plan out everything, in addition to Sara H's AN (and its add-ons).

It's mind-blowing how much time, energy, and $$$ some parents throw at the selective college admissions process.

You were on both AN and 3rd party national college counseling firm as well! So what is the difference?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Realize some parents pretend to have no real help and, in reality, have multiple counselors helping their kids with the application process.

Ex. I'm on AN, and there's a prolific mom/participant, with multiple HYPSM kids (including the most recent senior). Then you see the mom's name pop up in an email from a 3rd party national college counseling firm, for a presentation about passion projects or something. So, you realize this mom has been actively using a pricey multi-year national firm for these kids to precisely plan out everything, in addition to Sara H's AN (and its add-ons).

It's mind-blowing how much time, energy, and $$$ some parents throw at the selective college admissions process.

You were on both AN and 3rd party national college counseling firm as well! So what is the difference?

Anonymous wrote:Realize some parents pretend to have no real help and, in reality, have multiple counselors helping their kids with the application process.

Ex. I'm on AN, and there's a prolific mom/participant, with multiple HYPSM kids (including the most recent senior). Then you see the mom's name pop up in an email from a 3rd party national college counseling firm, for a presentation about passion projects or something. So, you realize this mom has been actively using a pricey multi-year national firm for these kids to precisely plan out everything, in addition to Sara H's AN (and its add-ons).

It's mind-blowing how much time, energy, and $$$ some parents throw at the selective college admissions process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your goal is T20 schools expect the process to be stressful, all 4 years. If T20 are not the goal, there is not much stress and it is a lot less effort both during admissions process and all 4 years of high school.

Nope. Not stressful for us at all.
Kids were interesting and passionate about their own things, though. We required our HS students to join and participate (actively) in 2 clubs in HS (starting freshman year - didn't care what it was) and their sport (at least 1). Kids did that.

Starting winter of junior year, started pulling together connections between all activities. A little forethought into 1-2 week summer programs prior but nothing "major". Kids did what they loved. Their "application narrative" was natural and not forced based entirely on what they did (you can do that too).

The older kid is at Ivy in RD (after a T10 deferral and rejection).
Younger kid (current senior) - committed to that T10 (accepted in RD) after a T20 deferral and later RD acceptance.
Private feeder HS likely helped.

Colleges can tell when a kid has an overly planned (and stressful) HS life. And when they aren't doing what they "love".
Neither kid had any of these things that are talked about here:
(1) university-level research (though both had their independent homegrown (small but interesting) projects),
(2) pay-to-play summer programs in their applications,
(3) patents or
(4) founded non-profits (though both volunteered for 4+ years at tiny pre-existing (different) nonprofits with local concentrated reach).

Kid 1 had several real jobs and was often the employee of the month.
Kid 2 had long-term national-level individual achievement in sports.

That is a lot of money and effort that went into this! LOL

Where's the money? Yes, I see a lot of kid effort.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your goal is T20 schools expect the process to be stressful, all 4 years. If T20 are not the goal, there is not much stress and it is a lot less effort both during admissions process and all 4 years of high school.

Nope. Not stressful for us at all.
Kids were interesting and passionate about their own things, though. We required our HS students to join and participate (actively) in 2 clubs in HS (starting freshman year - didn't care what it was) and their sport (at least 1). Kids did that.

Starting winter of junior year, started pulling together connections between all activities. A little forethought into 1-2 week summer programs prior but nothing "major". Kids did what they loved. Their "application narrative" was natural and not forced based entirely on what they did (you can do that too).

The older kid is at Ivy in RD (after a T10 deferral and rejection).
Younger kid (current senior) - committed to that T10 (accepted in RD) after a T20 deferral and later RD acceptance.
Private feeder HS likely helped.

Colleges can tell when a kid has an overly planned (and stressful) HS life. And when they aren't doing what they "love".
Neither kid had any of these things that are talked about here:
(1) university-level research (though both had their independent homegrown (small but interesting) projects),
(2) pay-to-play summer programs in their applications,
(3) patents or
(4) founded non-profits (though both volunteered for 4+ years at tiny pre-existing (different) nonprofits with local concentrated reach).

Kid 1 had several real jobs and was often the employee of the month.
Kid 2 had long-term national-level individual achievement in sports.

That is a lot of money and effort that went into this! LOL