We don't live in an HOA controlled area, but my local government has still figured out a way to make lions illegal to keep in a residential neighborhood. In fact, it used to be illegal to keep backyard chickens in my community, but people lobbied the city, and a reasonable ordinance was written, and now it is legal. To my mind, this is the way government should work -- it should be possible to change the laws when they become outdated, or new situations arise. However, the status of HOAs, as essentially a privatized pseudo-government organization, where the rules effectively can't be changed, is basically totalitarianism.

From the HOA of a friend of mine living in a 50+ year old development. o) No blacks or mexicans are allowed to live in the house. (!) I dropped the packet when I read that. Sure, it had been stamped on the front page with something to the effect that "Any illegal clauses are unenforceable", but the fact that these CC&Rs are so difficult to change, that they can't (or won't?) change anything that is so blatantly illegal and unethical, makes me cringe.

The complaint isn't so much that she didn't get in, but that her professors actively encouraged her to take this route, and were surprised the plan didn't work, and had no backup plan. Apparently, she did as much research as possible for undergraduates at that school. The equivalent metaphor is not that a high school student with a 1220 SAT didn't get into Harvard, it's that a public high school student with this score was convinced by her guidance counselor to only apply to Harvard and Yale, and be shocked when she didn't get in, and have no plan "B".

"Patying for the Party" is pretty certain that she didn't get into grad school because of her background: Quoting from "Paying for the Party" [Valerie graduated] with a 3.8 GPA, a 1220 on her GRE, great faculty recommendations, applications to to PhD programs in the humanities and minimal debt. ... she was only accepted to the least prestigious school on her list -- without any funding. It surprised her that she didn't get in, and it surprised her professors, too. "She was competing against Ivy league and elite liberal arts graduates, all with similar GPAs, but with likely better test scores, and more research experience."

I think she meant George Walker Bush, i.e. President #43.

Oh! That was the other thing that's bothered me about the interviews. I don't care what college US Presidents went to -- my goal as a parent isn't to raise Presidents or world-shakers. I just want my kids to be happy and well-adjusted, and not drowning in debt. The underlying theme here seems to be if your kid isn't on a path to be President of the US, you are a failure.

Ack! Quoting is messed up, so I'll just reply to this bit While I agree that being the sole unscathed major power after WWII helped the US economy a lot, generations much before that saw their children end up better than them. My great grandparents worked on a farm without electricity, and no indoor plumbing. I think most of America was agricultural in those days. This is a hard, hard life, and their kids, who mostly worked in factories (before WWII), had a much easier life. Even if my kids don't have the standard of living that I don't, I'm sure they won't be hauling water every morning.

I've heard a couple of interviews with Frank Bruni, the NYT columnist, and author of "Where you go is not who you'll be", a recent book about college admissions. Apparently, his thesis is that the elite colleges are not the be-all, and all, and that it is better to be a big fish in a small pond than vice versa. He points to his college experience, where despite an elite prep school upbringing, he chose not to go to an Ivy league school, but went to UNC-Chapel Hill instead, and was very successful in life. I haven't read the book yet, but wonder if I should. I have several misgivings from what I've heard already though: o) From my perspective, UNC-Chapel Hill, and many big state schools, are pretty elite, and by no means a shoo-in, or even inexpensive, especially for out of state applicants. But not all big state schools are this kind of elite, or, more accurately, not all departments at all big state schools. o) I know it is anecdotal, but I'm haunted by some of the reports I've read over the last few years about kids who graduate from college, and can't find any job in their field. In particular, in "Paying for the Party", one of the students is a classics major at Indiana University, which is not noted for that degree. She does very well, her professors like her, encourage her to pursue graduate work in classics, but she can't get accepted at any graduate school, ostensibly because of the quality of her undergraduate school. As a result, after graduation, she ends up in a full-time version of her college job, taking care of janitorial work in the dorms, a job which really doesn't require a college degree. o) A couple of years ago, we talked about this: a girl who apparently did well in school, but racked up six figures of debt, and could only find work as a Starbucks barrista. There was a lot of healthy discussion here about the value of a communications degree, some said that it was a sure ticket to a good job, others claimed it was an easy major with no good prospects. After thinking about this for some time, I now believe that the problem isn't the major, but the tiny college in the middle of Iowa that no one in New York has heard of, and expecting that a degree there will be a ticket to a job in the big city. So, I think I agree with some of the premise of the book: It isn't enough to just go to college, but you have to work hard to make the best of the opportunities present: find research positions, make personal connections with professors, etc. However, I'm starting to think that it does matter where you go to school, but not to the extent that it is the Ivies or nothing. I'm beginning to think that there are a lot of colleges in, say, the bottom 20% of their particular fields, especially, private LACs, who are not selective at all, who have no name recognition outside their local area, and yet still charge as much as the Ivies (!), these are the schools that it is important to avoid. So, one of my questions is, where is that line, below which it isn't a good idea to go to a particular department in a particular school, and how do you find that out?

My experience is that common sense is surprisingly uncommon.

What is normal depends a lot on the position. Relocation benefits for a CEO are going to be totally different than a line level worker. There is a job of "relocation specialist", which is like a super-duper real estate agent, who are almost always paid for by the employer. I think sometimes they have set packages of services, they employer pays a fixed fee to the relocation specialist, and they do all the work. Some other things you could ask for: o) A paid house hunting trip. o) A "gross up" of the relocation benefits -- as the benefits are tax-deductible, some companies will give you an extra X % to cover the tax o) Temporary housing for a few weeks in the new city while you look for a house o) Professional movers and storage until you find your house.

Respectfully, I would say the ball is in your court. I think a fair proposal is that you will pay the January rent immediately (if you haven't already), and for the next year, the monthly rent will be the initially-agreed-to-rent, plus the difference you weren't paying for the last year. If you think this is too expensive, I would honestly compare all the costs of moving -- first & last months rent, changing utilities, days off work, etc.

So cool! So jealous! If this is a one-time thing for DH, he may be focused on work during the week, stressed out about that, and not eager to travel on his weekends. It might work better for everyone if you and the kids took some side trips during weekdays, leaving the weekends to explore the local area as a family, living like a local.

In this day and age, when credit reports are so easily purchased, the result of eviction is much more severe than it ever was. An eviction will go on your credit report, and stay there for seven years, during which time it will be very difficult to rent a new place anywhere in the country, and could impact your ability to get a job. Even if you move now, if the current landlord sends your bill to collections, the result is almost as bad. I don't know how long your continuance is for, but I would move heaven and earth to make things right with your current landlord, be that a payment plan with quick move out, or something.

First, don't ask questions that are available on the college's web site, like "do you offer major X"? Ask to talk to a professor in her major. See if you can sit in on a class in the major. Ask the prof. where last year's seniors are now. Ask to talk to seniors in the major. What are the seniors doing outside of class? Ask how the students "find their tribe".

Go to your local library, and check out Sarah Susanka's book "The Not So Big House". This book isn't really about the smallest possible house. Her thesis is that too many people try to get the most possible square feet for their money, when instead, they should look at how they live, and try to design the best house for them. The classic example is the formal dining room. How many people have one that's used maybe once a year? Her website is: http://www.notsobighouse.com.

Or have strong beliefs in things other than traditional religion which trump the scientific method. Just today in the NYT, there was an article about a man who sued his neighbor, trying to force her remove her dimmer switches and fluorescent light bulbs, because claims to suffer from electromagnetic sensitivity, a malady that cannot be reproduced, and which consistently fails testing against placebo. Yet, she's out six figures in legal fees defending herself: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/science/when-science-is-lost-in-a-legal-maze.html

If the AP class is taken the senior year of high school, test results are probably too late for college entrance purposes.

You are the second person in a few weeks to post here about moving cross-country to a place you've never lived in before, and hoping to have their spouse sell real estate in their new state. Forgive me, but this just strikes me as so odd. Will his current real estate license transfer, or will he need to retake his licensing tests, and re-study Texas specific law? When I'm buying a house, I want my real estate agent to be an expert about the local area, more so than I am. Also, isn't the real estate business primarily about working your connections? Isn't moving going to be just like starting over from scratch? If oil prices are going to stay low for the next year or so, trying to start a real estate business in Texas may be very, very difficult, especially in the greater Houston area.

Anyone can sign up for the intro exam. I believe the intro exam is the only one they will let students repeat from one year to the next.

I think the biggest change is how much more there is to cover in an introductory Biology class than there was 30 years ago, which has nothing to do with the technology of education.

Gift certificate to a car wash? Also, I know things are different everywhere, but under our safe sport guidelines, a coach is never, ever, allowed to transport an unrelated child in his or her car.

Those of us, of a certain age, would point out that our parents loved to listen to Tom Lehrer's "New Math", written fifty years ago, which bemoaned the new math standards of the day, and that no parent could help their kids with.

The NLE has many years of old exams on their site. I'd use these to review. Usually the biggest hole for the Intro exam is the culture stuff, so I'd be sure to review that.

Perhaps you shouldn't learn what organic farmers use to fertilize their crops... :laugh:

Respectfully, I don't get it. So, there's a high probability that this camp/activity will be annoying to her, annoying to you, and in conflict with your beliefs. If, indeed, it is, I assume you'll pick her up early the first day, and not come back. In that case, she'll be already ticked off, you'll be ticked off, you'll be out money, and you'll both be out of the activity for the rest of the week.