Jump to content

Menu

eternalsummer

Members
  • Posts

    5,309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by eternalsummer

  1. I think isolation (in a sense) is a big emotional challenge. The neighborhood kids are scheduled from sunup to sundown and aren't around to play. Our homeschooling friends are spread out over a large distance. So, while we do go out and do a lot, there isn't as much free play for my kids, ergo down time for me.

     

    Also, dealing with other parents. At least in schools you don't have to deal directly with other parents all the time. Homeschoolers are generally really opinionated, and like to be in control, and are accustomed to doing things their way. When we all try to get together to do things, it can be difficult. Anytime you get lots of strong personalities together it is like that. Oh ya, and a lot of HS families I have interacted with are flakey. Not all, but more than the general population. Again, I think it is because of being accustomed to doing what they want and not really being committed to anyone else. We have been on the receiving end of lots of no-shows, several co-opo class flops, and some general lack of commitment to people outside their homes.

     

    I agree completely, and for me - I don't really like other people that much.  My kids do, though.  PS was easy because I never had to meet much of anybody for them to have friends.  Now (except for neighbor kids), I have to *talk* to other adults just to have my kid play regularly with other people their age.  Very stressful, and I have not figured it out yet.

  2. My 5 year old was in public school kindergarten about 5 months.  The teacher he had was on her 27th year and so she had taught when it was half day and now with it being full day.  I wouldn't say it was super academic (by January they had learned all the letters and sounds and a few sight words and numbers 1-20, though there was a lot of writing), but it was just really long.  7 hours with 30 minutes for lunch, only 15 minutes of recess, and 30 minutes of PE per day (plus art and music 30 minutes 2 days a week each).  My son's behavior after about noon was a problem most days and because of that he usually had to sit on the curb and watch the other kids during recess.  He wasn't allowed to play (which he needed to do VERY badly) and most days he lost "choice time" which was about an hour near the end of the day when the kids got to choose what to play (creative play, blocks, computer, looking at books, whatever).  If he lost choice time (which he did at least 3 days a week), he'd either have to sit and do nothing for that hour or whatever his teacher assigned him (generally looking at books... which he couldn't read... for an entire hour).

     

    This is the exact reason we're homeschooling.  Only for my son, the kicker was that the school has a silent lunch, meaning absolutely no talking in lunch ever.  The punishment for talking in lunch (which he did almost every day, because all the time up to that point was class work and no release of energy) was to walk in circles around the playground at lunch, watching the other kids play.  

     

    We didn't even know this was happening for the first 3 months; we never sent him back once we found out.

     

    He would have been fine in a half-day program.  He didn't need all the extra academics from the full day program anyway.

  3. I am so surprised how many of you were homeschooled yourselves.  Surely this was generally at least 15-20 years ago; is it too nosy to ask if most of you were homeschooled for religious reasons?  I thought there was pretty much no non-religious homeschool movement back then.

     

     

    I was always in public school; I went to 5 elementaries, 2 junior highs, and one high school.  I loved it, but 1. I was a girl and 2. Times have changed somewhat.  We had the kids in public school until it became obvious last fall that it wasn't the best option for them.  I never thought I'd homeschool.

  4. I like them a lot for early elementary - for a kid who just needs some basic exposure to math concepts, but not that much explicit instruction, they're great.  We haven't gotten to Fractions/Decimals yet and at that point we'll switch over permanently to BA and AoPS.  

     

    I say that as someone coming from Saxon, though, which was so boring it caused crying.  It also never taught my kids anything much about mathematical thinking or problem solving, so Fred has been a good transition to BA and more rigorous brain activity.

  5. We don't know that. He had a 2250, which is slightly below the median for Asian students at Harvard, but not wildly different from it. Plus he had a lot stronger extracurriculars than the typical Asian student (he was a varsity athlete, for example). An Asian kid with his extracurriculars would stand out from the pack of Asian kids with only orchestra and math or science team on their resumes.

     

    An Asian kid would not have likely been a varsity athlete (Asians are generally not as good at American sports as people of African descent, see the NBA, NFL, etc.).  Also, you really think an Asian kid with a 2250, 11th in his class, with a lot of APs, would have gotten into all 8 ivies?

  6. uh... wow. You sure have some interesting opinions about the place of women and minorities in higher education.  :blink:

     

    They're not opinions; women choose, across many different cultures/societies (with different social expectations of women's roles), fields like nursing, humanities, etc. over STEM fields.  This is true even in cultures where there is complete freedom of choice - Sweden, for example.

  7. No, I think there are many other relevant factors to a student's accomplishment/potential besides the SAT.  I'm just saying that it's important to be honest - this kid did not get into all 8 Ivies just because of his academic accomplishments and potential.  If he had been an Asian kid with the same record, he would not have gotten in.

     

    Legacy admissions are a similar bucket of worms to race-based admissions.  If this kid were a white kid who had ancestors who had attended all 8 Ivies, and he got into all 8, there would be no harm in saying, "Good for him but the legacy admissions had a part in it."

     

    With regards to women in STEM fields; there's a reason there are fewer women in STEM fields.  We are, on the whole, less inclined to be interested in the study of systems/mechanics/etc. than men.  Encouraging women to go into a field that doesn't hold a natural interest for them is counterproductive.

  8. If he were Asian/white and coming from a college degreed parentage, it's definitely true that he likely wouldn't have gotten into all 8 schools and MIGHT not have gotten into any.

     

    BUT, diversity in background (and other things) is GOOD.  He has it.  They are hooks - just as there are other hooks (homeschooling can be one of them - coming from rural areas can be another, coming from ND is a definite hook for eastern schools!).

     

    I get that race is a hook.  If Harvard (being a private school) or any of the other ivies want to favor people of certain races over others because they think having a non-white, non-asian background is a good thing for their school, that's cool.  

     

    But you can't say both that he was likely admitted partially because of his race (which is GOOD, you said) and say that it is bad to suggest he was admitted partially because of his race.

     

    And I think it's a legitimate position to question the value of racial diversity over other factors; it's not racist.  I'm not saying Harvard should prohibit people from certain backgrounds/races; I'm just saying that it's reasonable to suggest that the kid, who may be very deserving, may not be as deserving (separate of his unique background) as many many kids who got rejected, and there's no way to know *because* the schools have different standards for different races.

  9. No.  It is clear that his SAT scores would be competitive even if race were not considered because his score is higher than the median score for whites listed in CW's post.  Only the Indian and Asian median scores are higher.  Remember that a median is not a floor but a middle.  The low end of the score range - even for Asian and Indian applicants - would likely be less than 2250 (I'm not hunting down the stats right now - not sure whether that's available).

     

    His SAT scores would not be as competitive in a general pool as the median numbers above suggest.  They're above the median white score; however, with race-blind admissions, there would (presumably) be much higher numbers of Indians and East Asians admitted; it's hard to say what the overall median score would be but it's probably safe to say it would be somewhat higher than it is now, right?  If you cut out the bottom of the range (since you no longer have quotas to fill, or a reduced requirement for some races) and leave more room on top, there will be more scores on top, so it will be weighted more heavily to the top end of the score spectrum.

     

    He might still be within the range, but that makes him a lot less competitive than he is now.

  10. You'd be incorrect. We regularly stream PBS' News Hour along with CBS. I don't often listen to radio news at all. PBS is not the liberal equivalent of Fox News; MSNBC is. PBS and CBS news reports are generally straightforward recitation of events. They do not employ histrionics, constantly streaming provocative news banners, or engage in loud, emotional outbursts or facilitate one sided debates. They are not cable news commentary, which is what FOX, MSNBC, and CNN are.

     

    PBS and NPR are different programs.  NPR is National Public Radio.

  11. I have the opposite problem - my almost-9 year old is wholly unconcerned about spelling, grammar, conventions, staying on the lines of the paper (!!! this drives me crazy!), etc.  She writes well and prolifically, as long as you can decipher the crazy semi-phonetic spelling and ignore random capitalization and margins.  If the first thing to hand is a stubby green crayon, that's what she's doing math in today, and if it gets breakfast on it, oh well.  Convincing her that there is some value in neat writing or correct conventions is a battle.

  12. I dunno about the chores thing - my parents required literally nothing from me in the way of cleaning, chores, household duties - nothing.

     

    Then I got married, and for several years there was a lot of strife because I just naturally didn't pick up after myself, or take out the trash, or do the dishes, or anything.  Part of it was that I didn't know how- but that was easy to learn.  The hard part was conditioning myself to the idea that I lived with other people and had to modify my habits to meet those people somewhere in the middle, where we could both live comfortably (and where I wasn't imposing my messiness on them).

     

    How does that happen naturally, without teaching kids both how to clean and that they themselves must clean?

×
×
  • Create New...