Speaking of UC admissions a week ago...

[quark]

5 ECs are too few??? I live in a bubble. My kids do 2. Period. Even if they wanted to do more, there is no time.

 

Kiddo had:

1. 1 community service

2. 1 music

3. 1 active pursuit (for exercise): zumba

4. 1 to help kid socialize with same age peers (plus it really helps when you have a kid who is susceptible to anxiety and depression): improv

5. 1 math research pursuit

 

I was trying to say "not a ton". To me a ton is when kids do so many sports and so much music and so many other things during the summer just because parents worry it's not enough (not because the kid is asking to do it). Did I say 5 was too few? If so, my bad!

 

[quark]

This is where everything seems a bit subjective... I look at what he did and think --WOW! That's a lot of extra-curriculars. Yes, I know there are kids that do many, many more. Still, the amount he did doesn't seem insignificant to me.

 

 

 

WMA, I don't think I said 5 was too few did I? I'm trying to find where I said that and don't see it. I am trying to say that kiddo did not do a ton (and by ton I mean multiples of ECs just for the sake of doing them). :001_smile:

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Agreed.  Lord knows I do not advocate avoiding any stressful or competitive or time-consuming ECs.  I had a competitive gymnast (25 hours/week), a competitive swimmer (9 practices/week) and a travel baseball player; heck, "go big or go home" is one of our family's philosophies.  But I do not think a dilettante approach to ECs, 2 years of French club, a year of Quiz Bowl, 3 years of HS swim, 2 years of orchestra, etc., Knitting Club, etc., is going to get anyone into a competitive college.  Adcoms are not stupid; they know who is picking up ECs to check imaginary boxes.

 

In some ways, isn't this a little sad, though? A teen who hasn't found a passion or path might experiment with activities instead and is therefore at a disadvantage, right? Thus being perceived as  someone picking up ECs to check boxes. 

 

(Not the case here, thankfully, but it's something I've thought about in other situations.)

[...................]

Yes, you are misunderstanding me. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly. When I say some kids can do that genuinely, I mean kids who do what they do because they genuinely want to do it, not because they have to check boxes. I have an example like that in my nephew.

Ah, yes if you mean that your nephew is an extrovert and he chose these activities for fun, and not because of ANY outside influence of "checking the box" and "seeming good to colleges" ...

 

absolutely...some kids like to be somewhat busy and have a variety of interests and make friends easily wherever they go. :)

[...................]

In some ways, isn't this a little sad, though? A teen who hasn't found a passion or path might experiment with activities instead and is therefore at a disadvantage, right? Thus being perceived as  someone picking up ECs to check boxes. 

 

(Not the case here, thankfully, but it's something I've thought about in other situations.)

 

 

But there we go again, we are worried about our kid "being at a disadvantage" in how she/he is seen by Admissions..

 

I'd like to get to the point where we all say, Who gives a flying duck!!?? that's the point..we have to let our kids be who they are and not worry about how they are seen by admissions officers.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

WMA, I don't think I said 5 was too few did I? I'm trying to find where I said that and don't see it. I am trying to say that kiddo did not do a ton (and by ton I mean multiples of ECs just for the sake of doing them). :001_smile:

 

I'm confused. I didn't say you did, did I?  :)  Although I suppose given the thread in general, someone might come to that conclusion. (Not because you said it, just from various posts.)

 

I'm glad you posted this though. When you said kiddo did not do a ton, I didn't interpret that as meaning he didn't do multiple ECs just for the sake of doing them. I just read that as he didn't do many. Then I was surprised how many he did and how deep they were. That's why I commented what I did.  :)  

 

(I had been just skimming posts in various threads and wasn't following this in depth, so maybe my response was out in left field.  :laugh: )

[8filltheheart]

But there we go again, we are worried about our kid "being at a disadvantage" in how she/he is seen by Admissions..

 

I'd like to get to the point where we all say, Who gives a flying duck!!?? that's the point..we have to let our kids be who they are and not worry about how they are seen by admissions officers.

Or being convinced that only attending schools a-c are worthy and the rest are consolation prizes and kids futures are limited.

 

There are 100s of schools that kids can attend where no one cares about ECs and those universities won't deprive them of good future.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

But there we go again, we are worried about our kid "being at a disadvantage" in how she/he is seen by Admissions..

 

I'd like to get to the point where we all say, Who gives a flying duck!!?? that's the point..we have to let our kids be who they are and not worry about how they are seen by admissions officers.

 

My point was just that --  it's sad. This is reality. Acknowledging that doesn't mean I intend to alter anything.  Although, I also won't claim to not care at all. I care to the degree I need to care.  It would be foolish and costly not to. 

 

Life has all sorts of hoops. It's not just college. We each have to decide which ones are worth jumping.

[Roadrunner]

Or being convinced that only attending schools a-c are worthy and the rest are consolation prizes and kids futures are limited.

 

There are 100s of schools that kids can attend where no one cares about ECs and those universities won't deprive them of good future.

This is true, but we are all constrained by finances and geography. Those of us in CA who are full pay might not want to spend $60k on a private option when public universities are available. I think better SCUs have also gotten very competitive, but some of the lower ranked CSUs don’t seem appealing. I looked up an average SAT score of a local 4 year CSU and it’s substantially lower than the score my middle schooler got. So UCs (and not just Berkeley or UCLA, but others as well) are seen more of a quality budget option if you happen to be on the west coast and have a kid who isn’t interested in out of state. Not only are out of state schools expensive, but travel makes them very unappealing for many.

[quark]

I'm confused. I didn't say you did, did I?  :)  Although I suppose given the thread in general, someone might come to that conclusion. (Not because you said it, just from various posts.)

 

I'm glad you posted this though. When you said kiddo did not do a ton, I didn't interpret that as meaning he didn't do multiple ECs just for the sake of doing them. I just read that as he didn't do many. Then I was surprised how many he did and how deep they were. That's why I commented what I did.  :)  

 

(I had been just skimming posts in various threads and wasn't following this in depth, so maybe my response was out in left field.  :laugh: )

 

No you didn't! You are right! I was checking as I thought I might have but I try to be careful about what I say. I speak to a lot of families with younger children and keep trying to encourage them to follow any number that's right for their kids (keeping in mind that it all fluctuates depending on kid, age, and need), not just any specific number. Also a subsequent poster indicated that it sounded like someone said 5 was too few and why I checked. :tongue_smilie:

 

Honestly, it really is a bubble where we live. And I should not feel like I should qualify everything we did or didn't do but I still feel that way. :tongue_smilie:

 

[3andme]

Honestly, for larger schools, I think a random selection of any student who meets certain minimum academic criteria would produce just as well rounded and diverse a school as the current process. Take Oxford University for example; they clearly state they do not care about ECs only academic ability in a specific discipline and yet they have plenty of students that participate in music, drama, clubs and sports.

 

The current admissions process reminds a bit of the typical unstructured interview process which psychologists have found doesn't really do a great job of selecting the best applicants. Interviewers tend to overestimate their ability to evaluate the interviewer objectively and respond to all kinds of subjective cues which may have nothing to do with actual job performance. A more structured interview, on the other hand, that focuses on the real job demands (in this analogy - academics) tends to result in better candidate selection. 

 

For a small school with a particular bent or culture such as the arts etc., I think the idea of trying to craft a class may make some sense.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

No you didn't! You are right! I was checking as I thought I might have but I try to be careful about what I say. I speak to a lot of families with younger children and keep trying to encourage them to follow any number that's right for their kids (keeping in mind that it all fluctuates depending on kid, age, and need), not just any specific number. Also a subsequent poster indicated that it sounded like someone said 5 was too few and why I checked. :tongue_smilie:

 

Honestly, it really is a bubble where we live. And I should not feel like I should qualify everything we did or didn't do but I still feel that way. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

It's interesting because there is a bubble here too, but my response has been the opposite -- don't qualify. Give as many specific details as possible (allowing for privacy) and try to leave out subjective comments. Let people make their own judgement about whether it's too many, not enough, etc.

 

We've had opposite reactions due to opposite coasts!  :laugh:  :cheers2:

[SoCal_Bear]

I did read another interview about Yale admissions (not UC, but still useful), the director said that they could get rid of their entire freshman class and fill it with the rejected applicants and have the exact same quality of class. I thought it was too bad not enough people realize that this is really what it is like.

Edited March 20, 2018 by calbear

[8filltheheart]

This is true, but we are all constrained by finances and geography. Those of us in CA who are full pay might not want to spend $60k on a private option when public universities are available. I think better SCUs have also gotten very competitive, but some of the lower ranked CSUs don’t seem appealing. I looked up an average SAT score of a local 4 year CSU and it’s substantially lower than the score my middle schooler got. So UCs (and not just Berkeley or UCLA, but others as well) are seen more of a quality budget option if you happen to be on the west coast and have a kid who isn’t interested in out of state. Not only are out of state schools expensive, but travel makes them very unappealing for many.

But, if your kids are convinced those are their only options and don't get accepted, then what? There are no guarantees any of the crazy hoop jumping is worth it bc they can do "everything right" and still be rejected. Then, you end up like the dad in the linked article??

 

If your child's stats are so high that your child scored higher in middle school, then there are lists of affordable options OOS.

 

Want to stay in state? Well, you can play their game and get admitted or denied or let your students be themselves and let them be accepted or denied. ;) You take chances any way you slice it bc you don't know what will happen. There are absolutely no guarantees.

 

I just know for my kids that I would prefer to let them be themselves and take that chance bc they haven't lost anything integral to who they are. The only losses are just schools. No burn out bc they are trying to achieve some possibility. No self-degradation bc they are rejected. They recognize that there are lots of options out there and their worth isn't tied to schools a-c.

[Mabelen]

This is true, but we are all constrained by finances and geography. Those of us in CA who are full pay might not want to spend $60k on a private option when public universities are available. I think better SCUs have also gotten very competitive, but some of the lower ranked CSUs don’t seem appealing. I looked up an average SAT score of a local 4 year CSU and it’s substantially lower than the score my middle schooler got. So UCs (and not just Berkeley or UCLA, but others as well) are seen more of a quality budget option if you happen to be on the west coast and have a kid who isn’t interested in out of state. Not only are out of state schools expensive, but travel makes them very unappealing for many.

Exactly. I have an eighth grader and I have no idea how competitive it will be for her in four years time. I shudder to think about it. For what is worth, my oldest did attend a UC, but one of the lower ranking campuses, although she did get in a couple higher ones, because she got a merit scholarship which gave her priority registration and some money. She had a couple of ECs that told her story very well, which she highlighted in her application, and then a couple more for mostly social reasons.

[Arcadia]

I'd like to get to the point where we all say, Who gives a flying duck!!?? that's the point..we have to let our kids be who they are and not worry about how they are seen by admissions officers.

When SJSU is no longer viewed as a commuter safety, that’s when you have parents worried. CSUs were viewed as safeties for UCs applicants. The rest of the state universities aren’t within commuter distances so the extra room and board is a stretch for some families. Some did middle college program as part of public high school so they have an associate degree with their high school diploma. They could think about doing a gap year and applying again but it does shock parents. The cost of acceptance (http://www.sjsu.edu/faso/docs/1819%20COA_UgrdGradCred.pdf) assuming parents don’t charge rent is around $13k/yr while room and board adds another $15,594/yr for SJSU.

 

Also if they apply for a certain major in SJSU and didn’t get accepted, they won’t be considered for admission to their alternate major because the campus is impacted.

 

“Fall 2018 Impaction Results by Major

All majors at SJSU are impacted for freshmen, meaning that all applicants competed for space in the major, based on the applicant's CSU eligibility index at the time of application.

...

Consideration for admission to alternate major: SJSU did not have additional capacity to admit applicants to alternate majors for the fall 2018 term.

 

SJSU admits applicants to their alternate major only if there is additional capacity beyond those admitted as a primary major. This means that you might meet the threshold for your alternate major, but because there is no additional enrollment capacity to admit applicants to alternate majors, your application was withdrawn as unaccommodated.†http://www.sjsu.edu/admissions/impaction/impactionresultsfreshmen/index.html

 

ETA:

We have the financial luxury to not consider UCs or CSUs but it is easy to understand why people local to me are stressed. I was at the USCIS office this morning and I won’t mind working there, it’s relaxing and I get to see lots of people and be multilingual.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Arcadia

[plansrme]

Honestly, for larger schools, I think a random selection of any student who meets certain minimum academic criteria would produce just as well rounded and diverse a school as the current process. Take Oxford University for example; they clearly state they do not care about ECs only academic ability in a specific discipline and yet they have plenty of students that participate in music, drama, clubs and sports.

 

The current admissions process reminds a bit of the typical unstructured interview process which psychologists have found doesn't really do a great job of selecting the best applicants. Interviewers tend to overestimate their ability to evaluate the interviewer objectively and respond to all kinds of subjective cues which may have nothing to do with actual job performance. A more structured interview, on the other hand, that focuses on the real job demands (in this analogy - academics) tends to result in better candidate selection. 

 

For a small school with a particular bent or culture such as the arts etc., I think the idea of trying to craft a class may make some sense.

 

The truly elite universities could literally fill their entire incoming student bodies with kids with perfect SAT scores.  They can't really use GPAs as a supplement because those vary so widely from one school to another unless they limit admission to schools they know, which makes them too socioeconomically elitist.  So I don't know how, in the U.S., they could rely solely on academics.  Besides, if you're within striking distance, you can buy a perfect SAT with enough expensive test prep.

 

I actually think ad coms do a pretty good job, considering.  

[Roadrunner]

But, if your kids are convinced those are their only options and don't get accepted, then what? There are no guarantees any of the crazy hoop jumping is worth it bc they can do "everything right" and still be rejected. Then, you end up like the dad in the linked article??

 

If your child's stats are so high that your child scored higher in middle school, then there are lists of affordable options OOS.

 

Want to stay in state? Well, you can play their game and get admitted or denied or let your students be themselves and let them be accepted or denied. ;) You take chances any way you slice it bc you don't know what will happen. There are absolutely no guarantees.

 

I just know for my kids that I would prefer to let them be themselves and take that chance bc they haven't lost anything integral to who they are. The only losses are just schools. No burn out bc they are trying to achieve some possibility. No self-degradation bc they are rejected. They recognize that there are lots of options out there and their worth isn't tied to schools a-c.

My kid is interested in a certain small LAC far away that shall not be named 😂 but I am interested in an affordable state school that is within driving distance.

I think we just take what we get. Nobody in a right mind would apply only to reach schools.

Also, those of us lucky in CA have TAG (guaranteed admission to UCs) after 2 years at CC, which is for this budget conscious mom seems even more appealing. 😋

[SoCal_Bear]

Also, those of us lucky in CA have TAG (guaranteed admission to UCs) after 2 years at CC, which is for this budget conscious mom seems even more appealing. 😋

 

Just for those who are unaware, TAG agreements do not apply for the top 3 UCs. (UCB, UCLA, UCSD). Admissions as junior transfer are application only for those UCs.

 

 

Edited March 20, 2018 by calbear

[SeaConquest]

When SJSU is no longer viewed as a commuter safety, that’s when you have parents worried. 

 

We have the same issue here with SDSU. I went to Claremont McKenna and Stanford Law School, but cannot get into SDSU for nursing because my stats are too low.  :crying:  I remember when it used to be just Cal Poly SLO that was competitive. Ah, the good old days, when SDSU was best known for being Playboy's top party school.  :lol:

[Mabelen]

Just for those who are unaware, TAG agreements do not apply for the top 3 UCs. (UCB, UCLA, UCSD). Admissions as junior transfer are application only for those UCs.

And there are no guarantees that the current TAG agreements will stay. I suppose other campuses could go the same way as selectivity keeps creeping up and up and trickling down the pecking order.

[Arcadia]

Also, those of us lucky in CA have TAG (guaranteed admission to UCs) after 2 years at CC, which is for this budget conscious mom seems even more appealing. 😋

There is only 6 campuses left though in TAG and none are near enough to commute. UCSC is at least an hour’s drive away and my kids get car sick on highway 17 consistently. UCSC housing cost has gone up too because we did look at buying in that area.

 

From UC Transfer Admission Guarantee (TAG) for Students Applying for 2018-2019 Admission http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/files/tag-matrix.pdf

 

UCDavis (excluded Undeclared programs and Landscape Architecture (applicants are approved in pre-Landscape Architecture with no guarantee to the major); both Textiles and Clothing and Fiber and Polymer Science are suspended 2018-19. Natural Sciences has been discontinued.)

 

UCIrvine (excluded Business Administration, Cognitive Sciences, Dance, Music, Nursing Science)

 

UCMerced (excluded English, Global Arts and Studies Program, Public Health, and Spanish not available at date of publication. Subject to change.)

 

UCRiverside (excluded Art (Studio))

 

UCSB (excluded All majors in the College of Creative Studies; all majors in the College of Engineering; Dance B.A., Dance B.F.A., Music B.M., Theater B.F.A. in the College of Letters & Science.)

 

UCSanta Cruz (none excluded)

[...................]

Or being convinced that only attending schools a-c are worthy and the rest are consolation prizes and kids futures are limited.

 

There are 100s of schools that kids can attend where no one cares about ECs and those universities won't deprive them of good future.

 

There are constraints of finances and where we live though and that is a fact.  My son has his own dreams and goals and ambitions that are his and nobody else's.  While he realizes there are many paths to those dreams and goals, he also realizes the path he, himself desires.  Fortunately, I worked hard to do my research to find the least stressful path to the places he wants. We also have constraints of food allergy issues, travel issues due to food allergy and more.  So, there is a more narrow path for him because of all of these constraints. BUT it's definitely NOT ONE or TWO schools, and even if he chooses, because of his own finances, to live at home and go to the state school, we are OK with that too.  I will be thrilled to see him go to any college as long as he is happy and pursuing his career and dream, and he knows the path to take.  If he goes to the state school, he'll probably need to go somewhere "better" to get a master's to get where he really wants.  It would be a more slow route but that's fine!  

 

Going out of state, we did find two options that might have worked for him as a freshman, ,and even as a transfer, so I have put those out there for him to check out.  At this point he's totally not into it.  But that could change...

 

THIS is why we did CC and we aren't worried about TAG either.  He will get in, somewhere....

Edited March 20, 2018 by Calming Tea

[...................]

When SJSU is no longer viewed as a commuter safety, that’s when you have parents worried. CSUs were viewed as safeties for UCs applicants. The rest of the state universities aren’t within commuter distances so the extra room and board is a stretch for some families. Some did middle college program as part of public high school so they have an associate degree with their high school diploma. They could think about doing a gap year and applying again but it does shock parents. The cost of acceptance (http://www.sjsu.edu/faso/docs/1819%20COA_UgrdGradCred.pdf) assuming parents don’t charge rent is around $13k/yr while room and board adds another $15,594/yr for SJSU.

 

Also if they apply for a certain major in SJSU and didn’t get accepted, they won’t be considered for admission to their alternate major because the campus is impacted.

 

“Fall 2018 Impaction Results by Major

All majors at SJSU are impacted for freshmen, meaning that all applicants competed for space in the major, based on the applicant's CSU eligibility index at the time of application.

...

Consideration for admission to alternate major: SJSU did not have additional capacity to admit applicants to alternate majors for the fall 2018 term.

 

SJSU admits applicants to their alternate major only if there is additional capacity beyond those admitted as a primary major. This means that you might meet the threshold for your alternate major, but because there is no additional enrollment capacity to admit applicants to alternate majors, your application was withdrawn as unaccommodated.†http://www.sjsu.edu/admissions/impaction/impactionresultsfreshmen/index.html

 

ETA:

We have the financial luxury to not consider UCs or CSUs but it is easy to understand why people local to me are stressed. I was at the USCIS office this morning and I won’t mind working there, it’s relaxing and I get to see lots of people and be multilingual.

BUT this is why we have CC's and TAG....parents should not be worried even when they're hearing SJSU isn't a safety any more....

 

BUT I don't care if this IS the situation, I don't care if it IS a bit hairy.....we will figure out other creative options before we will do to our kids what the dad in the article is doing to his.  And our path to doing that was to utilize the CCs.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Calming Tea

[Arcadia]

BUT this is why we have CC's and TAG....parents should not be worried even when they're hearing SJSU isn't a safety any more....

We have many middle college programs around here. Some kids already have their associates for free while in high school. TAG is limited to 6 campuses and some of the campuses have exclusions, only UCSC has no exclusion but its estimated cost of attendance is $36,588 (https://financialaid.ucsc.edu/costs/undergraduate-costs.html) for on campus. Four years commuting to SJSU would still be cheaper than two years at UCSC on campus. SJSU is 8 miles away (50mins by light rail), UCSC is 38 miles away (2hrs 16mins with 2 transfers). Even if the young adult drives to campus, that would put an extra 60 miles wear and tear on the car every day he/she drives there and back.

[8filltheheart]

We have many middle college programs around here. Some kids already have their associates for free while in high school. TAG is limited to 6 campuses and some of the campuses have exclusions, only UCSC has no exclusion but its estimated cost of attendance is $36,588 (https://financialaid.ucsc.edu/costs/undergraduate-costs.html) for on campus. Four years commuting to SJSU would still be cheaper than two years at UCSC on campus. SJSU is 8 miles away (50mins by light rail), UCSC is 38 miles away (2hrs 16mins with 2 transfers). Even if the young adult drives to campus, that would put an extra 60 miles wear and tear on the car every day he/she drives there and back.

$36k+ has lots of equivalences elsewhere and a list of much cheaper options even with no discount. Here is an older list. https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/financial-aid-scholarships/1651944-very-low-cost-oos-coa-universities-less-than-25k-coa-for-everything.html I didn't go through the list, but Truman State and sdsmt are 2 that I am aware of that with no merit aid are still less than $25k for everything as OOS students.

 

http://www.truman.edu/admission-cost/cost-aid/tuition-costs/

https://www.sdsmt.edu/Admissions/Tuition-and-Fees/

 

If kids qualify for merit, there are long lists of school that can get to $25k and under, many way under.

[8filltheheart]

BUT I don't care if this IS the situation, I don't care if it IS a bit hairy.....we will figure out other creative options before we will do to our kids what the dad in the article is doing to his daughter.

I agree. One way of thinking of this is that you can find schools that match your kids or you can try to morph your kids into what you think specific schools want and hope it works.

[MarkT]

ECs don’t need to be stress inducing. In fact they can be just the opposite. For kids cooked up in the classroom all day, playing soccer for couple of hours afterwards (or other sport) might just be the relaxation they need. For one of my children it’s his orchestra. His week really revolves around it and his instrument practice. It’s almost magical.

I agree that when ECs are forced, they don’t produce much food for anybody, but seeing a kid play violin doesn’t mean their parents made him.

I have extroverts at home. My children don’t like to stay home more than one day a week. They thrive on ECs.

yes my sports was a great outlet.

 

[ Although I ran into HS coaches playing/promoting "favorites" sometimes made it less enjoyable at that level. Benching some Seniors to give Sophomores more playing time "to build for the future" was one of my sports pet peeves.  It's not like we were going to win the Stanley Cup two years from now! 

At the younger levels most teams are in two year age brackets so much less of that. ]

[...................]

We have many middle college programs around here. Some kids already have their associates for free while in high school. TAG is limited to 6 campuses and some of the campuses have exclusions, only UCSC has no exclusion but its estimated cost of attendance is $36,588 (https://financialaid.ucsc.edu/costs/undergraduate-costs.html) for on campus. Four years commuting to SJSU would still be cheaper than two years at UCSC on campus. SJSU is 8 miles away (50mins by light rail), UCSC is 38 miles away (2hrs 16mins with 2 transfers). Even if the young adult drives to campus, that would put an extra 60 miles wear and tear on the car every day he/she drives there and back.

You can save EVEN more money by going from a CC to SJSU if you want 😉 total cost for my dd will be 17k for a bachelors.

 

(And I’m not counting her cost of CC because it’s 1/4 what I would pay for quality online and co-op classes. So I consider that high school cost not college cost. :) )

Edited March 20, 2018 by Calming Tea

[SanDiegoMom]

nm

Edited March 20, 2018 by SanDiegoMom in VA

[Arcadia]

You can save EVEN more money by going from a CC to SJSU if you want 😉 total cost for my dd will be 17k for a bachelors.

I am not talking about my kids in case you misunderstood. I could enroll my kids in the middle college program for our district which would pay for their associates degree if I want to save some money. We might also be relocating out of state if the relocation package works out. It’s another very HCOL city.

 

I am referring to my friends with 11th graders in public high schools (not just in my district) that are making their list of financial safeties. We border with three school districts. Some already has an associate degree compliments of their district’s middle college program. That was how our favorite car mechanic saves money as his daughter knew what she wanted to major in before entering high school and was able to shave two years off college.

 

Starbucks College Achievement Plan tie in with ASU online is worth looking into for them if the worse happen and the kids get rejected from all safeties. These are hardworking but “average†(grades and ECs) not pointy kids who are already working part time at fast food chains. Their family income is in the donut hole category. Some are looking at majoring in humanities which has a lower index cutoff but there is always the uncertainty until acceptance letters comes in.

[8filltheheart]

This thread might interest some of you.

https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/national-merit-scholarships/2065037-schools-that-rejected-your-ds-or-dd-who-is-a-nmf-p1.html

[madteaparty]

5 ECs are too few??? I live in a bubble. My kids do 2. Period. Even if they wanted to do more, there is no time.

 

Mine has zero. No documentable sport, no instrument. Shrug. Life is just too damn short. 

[GoodGrief]

Yes, you are misunderstanding me. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly. When I say some kids can do that genuinely, I mean kids who do what they do because they genuinely want to do it, not because they have to check boxes. I have an example like that in my nephew.

 

A couple of comments from someone who did have a suicidal daughter, and who had another, different kid who juggled multiple varied activities because she had the interest and the motivation, with no parental pressure.

 

I also have a third child who has one extracurricular, cheer, or two if you count the school band class. I recently was trying to talk that one OUT of doing honors in high school because I wasn't sure the curricula matched her personality and learning style.

 

Depression/anxiety is a mental illness, generally a biological and chemical process. Suicidal behavior is a symptom of that illness. It's all more complicated than that, of course, but please stop blaming overbearing parents and colleges for this phenomenon. I live in a geographical area where the race for competitive college admissions is not remotely a thing, and yet suicide rates are among the highest in the nation. Just stop with that line of thinking; it is not helpful.

 

FWIW, I do think that a drive to be extremely active CAN be a coping mechanism for some who have a tendency toward anxiety and depression, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if it gets people through the day.

[Roadrunner]

This thread might interest some of you.

https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/national-merit-scholarships/2065037-schools-that-rejected-your-ds-or-dd-who-is-a-nmf-p1.html

I glanced at some posts.

 

I will say that with all the horror stories we know many very very mediocre kids who were accepted to Berkeley and USC and the likes. So this pendulum swings in all sorts of directions.

 

A high GPAs also don’t surprise me. Our school weights all AP and Honors courses and hands out As as cake pops. And we live in one of the top districts in the state.

[...................]

A couple of comments from someone who did have a suicidal daughter, and who had another, different kid who juggled multiple varied activities because she had the interest and the motivation, with no parental pressure.

 

I also have a third child who has one extracurricular, cheer, or two if you count the school band class. I recently was trying to talk that one OUT of doing honors in high school because I wasn't sure the curricula matched her personality and learning style.

 

Depression/anxiety is a mental illness, generally a biological and chemical process. Suicidal behavior is a symptom of that illness. It's all more complicated than that, of course, but please stop blaming overbearing parents and colleges for this phenomenon. I live in a geographical area where the race for competitive college admissions is not remotely a thing, and yet suicide rates are among the highest in the nation. Just stop with that line of thinking; it is not helpful.

 

FWIW, I do think that a drive to be extremely active CAN be a coping mechanism for some who have a tendency toward anxiety and depression, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if it gets people through the day.

You’re Misunderstanding why we are mentioning suicide. There’s an epidemic in Palo Alto area and it is absolutely linked to the pressures of parents/college/society and sleep deprivation.

 

The same thing is happening in parts of japan and China.

[...................]

A couple of comments from someone who did have a suicidal daughter, and who had another, different kid who juggled multiple varied activities because she had the interest and the motivation, with no parental pressure.

 

I also have a third child who has one extracurricular, cheer, or two if you count the school band class. I recently was trying to talk that one OUT of doing honors in high school because I wasn't sure the curricula matched her personality and learning style.

 

Depression/anxiety is a mental illness, generally a biological and chemical process. Suicidal behavior is a symptom of that illness. It's all more complicated than that, of course, but please stop blaming overbearing parents and colleges for this phenomenon. I live in a geographical area where the race for competitive college admissions is not remotely a thing, and yet suicide rates are among the highest in the nation. Just stop with that line of thinking; it is not helpful.

 

FWIW, I do think that a drive to be extremely active CAN be a coping mechanism for some who have a tendency toward anxiety and depression, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if it gets people through the day.

And you’re not being helpful when you don’t even read the thread and do the research. Please

Don’t tell people to stop. People in this are need to understand the consequences of the society they’ve created.

[Roadrunner]

You’re Misunderstanding why we are mentioning suicide. There’s an epidemic in Palo Alto area and it is absolutely linked to the pressures of parents/college/society and sleep deprivation.

 

The same thing is happening in parts of japan and China.

This is an absolute truth. We have met a family in the process of relocating out of the Bay Area. This is a family of pediatricians with horror stories to tell about depression rates among the teens in the area. They pulled their kindergartener out of school after he developed anxiety in the classroom. This is in Cupertino. I believe he was one of the handful of non immigrant (mostly immigrant population from Asia) kids and apparently even in K those kids were starting their day with a tutor before and then after school. This is the sort of crazy my mind can’t even comprehend.

[8filltheheart]

I glanced at some posts.

 

I will say that with all the horror stories we know many very very mediocre kids who were accepted to Berkeley and USC and the likes. So this pendulum swings in all sorts of directions.

 

A high GPAs also don’t surprise me. Our school weights all AP and Honors courses and hands out As as cake pops. And we live in one of the top districts in the state.

You missed the point in my linking the thread. GPA and test scores are not going to lead to guaranteed admissions. There are other factors at play. Some are tangible like first generation students and major. Some are intangible and those are where comparisons and frustrations enter when looking at it from this side. We can't see what admissions is seeing from their side. We can only infer from this side.

 

It is why applying with expectations of acceptance or equally bad, if not worse, applying with the belief in the necessity of acceptances to certain schools in order to be successful leads to so much heart ache. Applying broadly and affirming that they can be successful no matter where they attend and that admissions does not define success is both true and a healthier attitude for the student. There are 1000s of excellent kids rejected from top schools every yr.

 

There are 1000s of excellent students who don't apply to top schools every yr bc they cannot afford them. Those excellent students attend avg colleges in very large numbers. The saddest outcome is not rejection. The saddest outcome is when kids believe their futures are doomed bc they weren't accepted.

 

Too much self-worth and future prospects are being directly tied to the admissions process. That is what is leading to the crazy cycle of extreme EC and courseloads.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Of course the stress of high school and college isn't the only contributing factor to suicide. That doesn't mean it never is and that it's not a real problem, particularly in some areas. Suicide is often the result of a perfect storm of nature and nurture. Environment matters. Not identifying a potential problem and addressing it as best we can might have tragic consequences. Of course there are no guarantees. Sometimes despite our best efforts these tragedies happen.

 

In some areas unemployment may contribute to a rash of suicides. In other places, high levels of school stress contribute. Blaming is different than identifying a problem and taking concrete steps for positive change.

[madteaparty]

You missed the point in my linking the thread. GPA and test scores are not going to lead to guaranteed admissions. There are other factors at play. Some are tangible like first generation students and major. Some are intangible and those are where comparisons and frustrations enter when looking at it from this side. We can't see what admissions is seeing from their side. We can only infer from this side.

 

It is why applying with expectations of acceptance or equally bad, if not worse, applying with the belief in the necessity of acceptances to certain schools in order to be successful leads to so much heart ache. Applying broadly and affirming that they can be successful no matter where they attend and that admissions does not define success is both true and a healthier attitude for the student. There are 1000s of excellent kids rejected from top schools every yr.

 

There are 1000s of excellent students who don't apply to top schools every yr bc they cannot afford them. Those excellent students attend avg colleges in very large numbers. The saddest outcome is not rejection. The saddest outcome is when kids believe their futures are doomed bc they weren't accepted.

 

Too much self-worth and future prospects are being directly tied to the admissions process. That is what is leading to the crazy cycle of extreme EC and courseloads.

Saddest outcome is spending 4+ years of a kid's life for some not very well-understood goal of getting into a particular college. For what? So they get a job and become another shiny cog in the big wheel? Nah. Let my kid never get a job. Life is for living. We will all eventually become cogs, why precipitate the process? :)

[8filltheheart]

Saddest outcome is spending 4+ years of a kid's life for some not very well-understood goal of getting into a particular college. For what? So they get a job and become another shiny cog in the big wheel? Nah. Let my kid never get a job. Life is for living. We will all eventually become cogs, why precipitate the process? :)

Except that it is a myth that the only good jobs to be had come from degrees from a handful of schools. ;)

[Roadrunner]

You missed the point in my linking the thread. GPA and test scores are not going to lead to guaranteed admissions. There are other factors at play. Some are tangible like first generation students and major. Some are intangible and those are where comparisons and frustrations enter when looking at it from this side. We can't see what admissions is seeing from their side. We can only infer from this side.

 

It is why applying with expectations of acceptance or equally bad, if not worse, applying with the belief in the necessity of acceptances to certain schools in order to be successful leads to so much heart ache. Applying broadly and affirming that they can be successful no matter where they attend and that admissions does not define success is both true and a healthier attitude for the student. There are 1000s of excellent kids rejected from top schools every yr.

 

There are 1000s of excellent students who don't apply to top schools every yr bc they cannot afford them. Those excellent students attend avg colleges in very large numbers. The saddest outcome is not rejection. The saddest outcome is when kids believe their futures are doomed bc they weren't accepted.

 

Too much self-worth and future prospects are being directly tied to the admissions process. That is what is leading to the crazy cycle of extreme EC and courseloads.

Every parent who has ever inquired about college admissions about selective schools would agree with you. The key word here is selective schools. Now what is beginning to happen in CA is schools that weren’t all that selective and intended for middle range of kids have become also super selective, leaving few in state affordable choices. Another key words here is in state and affordable as in public, because a lot of us would like our children to be able to drive home if needed. Ten hours driving distance is the maximum for many children here. I don’t think anybody on this thread is dillusional about selective schools. It’s more than that. Those of us in CA need public university system to have more than just super selective options and those options are quickly vanishing.

[EKS]

The idea that it's totally unfair for UCs to expect a minimum ACT of 26, when the US average is only 21, is equally absurd. 

 

I completely agree.  My understanding is that the original pool of students that UC schools were intended for was the top 15%, the CSUs were for the top 30%, and the junior colleges were for everyone else.  An ACT composite score of 26 corresponds to something like the 83rd percentile, so it's consistent with the original intent of the UC system.  Frankly, I was surprised that the absolute cutoff was so low.

[madteaparty]

Every parent who has ever inquired about college admissions about selective schools would agree with you. The key word here is selective schools. Now what is beginning to happen in CA is schools that weren’t all that selective and intended for middle range of kids have become also super selective, leaving few in state affordable choices. Another key words here is in state and affordable as in public, because a lot of us would like our children to be able to drive home if needed. Ten hours driving distance is the maximum for many children here. I don’t think anybody on this thread is dillusional about selective schools. It’s more than that. Those of us in CA need public university system to have more than just super selective options and those options are quickly vanishing.

Ok, but in this country, a state university system that's excellent and somewhat affordable is the exception, not the rule. My offer to switch spots with me in NY stands, you know ;)

[8filltheheart]

Every parent who has ever inquired about college admissions about selective schools would agree with you. The key word here is selective schools. Now what is beginning to happen in CA is schools that weren’t all that selective and intended for middle range of kids have become also super selective, leaving few in state affordable choices. Another key words here is in state and affordable as in public, because a lot of us would like our children to be able to drive home if needed. Ten hours driving distance is the maximum for many children here. I don’t think anybody on this thread is dillusional about selective schools. It’s more than that. Those of us in CA need public university system to have more than just super selective options and those options are quickly vanishing.

This isn't unique to CA. CA just happens to have a higher percentage of excellent schools and has made the decision to not cap OOS admission. For example, NC schools cap OOS admissions at 18%. If they followed CA's approach, in-state students would suddenly be in the same situation as CA residents bc those top kids rejected from the top NC schools would filter down to the lower ranked schools bumping out the lower stat kids. When seats are filled from non-residents, where are the students going to go? Either filter down and causing the bumping of the lower students or go OOS.

[Arcadia]

Below quoted October 2017 article is about the Gunn High suicide cluster

 

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2017/10/06/gunn-high-students-still-looking-for-change

“Amidst a cloud of high ambitions, high expectations, high stress and high aversion to vulnerability, many students put on a facade of having it all. They often give themselves no room for failure and feel they have to hide insecurities in order to measure up to their peers and the often unrealistic standards they themselves — and others — impose upon their lives.

 

As self-worth becomes inextricably intertwined with academic results and maintaining a successful facade becomes their norm, students said they find themselves less and less able to take steps to care for their mental health. And though the majority of people who die by suicide — 90 percent — have a diagnosable mental disorder, according to health care professionals, mental health and wellness are critical to helping prevent suicides.

...

Many students feel as if the norm in Palo Alto is a very specific image of excellence — high grade-point average (GPA), strong standardized test scores, leadership in multiple extracurriculars, then attendance at a prestigious Ivy League college and, eventually, a six-figure income.

...

Junior Meghna Singh moved to Palo Alto from Boston in the summer before fourth grade. Palo Alto's high-pressure environment, she said, was not present in Boston. People here are "super high-achieving," she said.

 

Silicon Valley's intense work culture, said senior and current school board representative Advait Arun, rubs off on the teenagers who live here.

 

"Everyone wants success, and that's not a bad thing, but people take the high-pressure environment and stay under pressure, stay stressed just to achieve success," he said.

...

The "white picket fence American dream," said Gunn alumna Shannon Yang, is the only future Palo Alto children see growing up.

 

It's the "perfect life," but to have it, you have to "get a good job, live in Palo Alto, have a Palo Alto house, family, richness," said Yang, who graduated in May.

 

"Since this is such an affluent community, anything under a six-figure salary would entail downward mobility and a sudden reduction in the quality of life we've been used to growing up, which is scary," she said. "Most people's parents have had to work to get where they are, so it's probably more an expectation" that their children would be similarly upwardly mobile.

...

Arun added that though not every Palo Alto student attends a top-ranked college, "going through middle and high school, all you hear about are the students with 4.0s who get into the Ivy Leagues and Stanford."

 

"Even if they're in the minority, they're the only ones you hear about," he said.

...

"On paper, when you're dealing with other people, it's much easier to say, 'Grades don't matter,'" Navjeevan said. "And you believe that until you have to apply it to yourself."

 

"I think it's because you hold yourself to a lot higher standards than you hold others," she added. "You know that getting bad grades isn't a big deal, and you know it because your friend is still this amazing person no matter what their GPA is, but when you start using GPA and letter grades to measure yourself, then it matters a lot more."â€

 

This link is for the 214 pages CDC report requested by the county after the Palo Alto High suicide cluster. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/hi/hd/epi-aid/Documents/epi-aid-report.pdf

[Arcadia]

My offer to switch spots with me in NY stands, you know ;)

Our relocation a few years ago was to Malta, NY. Staying in Saratoga Springs downtown (as I don’t drive and need efficient public transport) on a pay cut, higher property tax and school tax as well as a higher heating bill made it a no go and my husband opt for retrenchment.

 

My single friend who drives and love skiing enjoys working in Albany as a lawyer since she can ski often and she is not scared of cold. She needs air con the way I need central heating.

[madteaparty]

Our relocation a few years ago was to Malta, NY. Staying in Saratoga Springs downtown (as I don’t drive and need efficient public transport) on a pay cut, higher property tax and school tax as well as a higher heating bill made it a no go and my husband opt for retrenchment.

 

My single friend who drives and love skiing enjoys working in Albany as a lawyer since she can ski often and she is not scared of cold. She needs air con the way I need central heating.

I love where I live (and going through SE Asia now during burning season makes me miss my trees that much more), but I also had to learn to drive, and the kids learnt to ski when we moved upstate. The state university system just doesn’t compare with CA. Not even a bit.

[SeaConquest]

This thread might interest some of you.

https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/national-merit-scholarships/2065037-schools-that-rejected-your-ds-or-dd-who-is-a-nmf-p1.html

 

Good reminder to stay off CC. That is some depressing stuff right there. Eesh.