S/O - how important is a HS text to success in college

[Miss Marple]

The Apologia thread is a good excuse to put out this question that I've been pondering for quite some time.

 

How important is the rigor of a high school course to the success (in the same field) of the student in college?

 

I wonder if success in college comes from a desire to succeed and a willingness to do whatever it takes to get there vs. how prepared one was before going to college. My own experience would support the idea that willingness to work hard produced success. I had one science class in high school - a chemistry class where we made soap, learned the basic metric system, and learned about something called a periodic chart. I had no idea of the atom, electrons, much less balancing equations, etc. When I got to college it was all new to me.

 

I realize that I would have had to work less hard if I had received a better basis for chemistry, but I did do well without that base.

 

In terms of Apologia, I think that if anyone does all the books (2 per year) one would definitely have to be motivated as well as inherently bright in order to absorb that amount of information. Would that student have succeeded just as well with a regular text doing the regular high school sequence?

 

But on the flip side, I see so many families opting for the easiest curriculum for their high schoolers (sometimes using lower level texts) and these kids don't seem prepared for college. Is it the text that is the problem or is it the lack of commitment on the part of the parents that these kids are emulating? Could these kids do well if they have a desire to succeed?

 

In terms of writing, I have to say that my oldest was not well prepared for college level writing (my fault - I just don't teach/do that well). *But* he has been one of the top students in his freshman comp classes - so obviously he can learn well.

 

I sometimes wonder if we beat ourselves up too much in worrying about how well we have prepared our kids academically. I would not advocate using curriculum designed for lower levels and calling it high school level, nor would I advocate not teaching certain courses. It just seems to me that kids who are going to succeed will succeed whether they have a rigorous high school experience or not. Maybe the ones who are more impacted by curriculum choice would be the kids who are average.

 

I know of one young lady who is the oldest of 12 kids. Her mother was still having babies when she was in high school and college. Whenever I saw her she was usually caring for 2-3 of the younger kids. She homeschooled herself (according to both the girl and her mom) and attended the local community college for 2 years after high school. She then transferred to OU and finished out her degree. She was then admitted to medical school on her first try. She did not have a rigorous high school education and that particular CC is also not considered rigorous. But medical school is what she wanted and she worked hard and succeeded. Her parents were always encouraging her as well as providing opportunities for her to learn.

 

Sorry for all the rambling...I'm just typing as the thoughts come to me :D What do you all think? What has been your experience? What do you see with your fellow homeschoolers?

[Kareni]

Much food for thought, Cynthia.

 

I can relate a story similar to your tale of the young woman who went on to medical school. I recall helping a friend in his first year of college French using my high school knowledge; he'd had no French prior to that time. He ultimately went on to get a PhD in French. So, I think that the desire to learn and succeed can take a person far even if they have no high school knowledge of the subject. (Think too of majors that are available at the college level that are not even available in most high schools -- Philosophy, Arabic, Computer Game Design, Linguistics, and so on.)

 

Still, I do think a solid foundation of the basics (particularly reading, writing, mathematics) and the ability to study will give a student a firm grounding upon which to build.

 

I enjoyed your rambling, so don't apologize!

 

Regards,

Kareni

[Rosie_0801]

I can only speak for my own experiences of studying humanities. I did not have a good high school education. My parents weren't well educated either, so I wasn't getting that boost from home. Despite that, I qualified for the history honours program, even though I barely studied history at school. I was a C grade student in first year and chose to a few 2nd year subjects over summer school just to keep the brain ticking over, and the lecturer was most traumatised that an enthusiastic, evidently dedicated person was only getting Cs, so he printed out some really thorough instructions on essay writing (which I'd never learned at school) and I got mostly As from then on. I would never have managed first class honours (I stopped to have babies anyway :) ) but I would have done reasonably well. My writing is not as strong as I'd like it to be, and my research and critical thinking skills aren't where I'd like them to be either. Still, I'm better off than I was before I started uni because I now know what those skills are and how to improve. When I started uni, I had a vague idea I was missing something that others had, but couldn't define what it was. I think these meta skills are far, far more important than beginning a course having already read the text books. Studying subject content in high school is a good idea so the kids are realistic about what the subject entails, so they are enrolling in a uni course they like, not just one they like the idea of.

 

Rosie

[Renee in NC]

I don't think it matters.

 

I was a high school dropout after the 10th grade.

 

I got a degree with no struggles (except for Quantitative Analysis - yuck!) I never took Chemistry in high school and did just fine. I also took several Biology courses (including a couple of upper level courses) with no problem.

 

However, I will use the most rigorous texts for my dc in high school in case that is as far as they go.

[G5052]

However, some college students will get discouraged if they're "behind" and not do what they have to in order to catch up. I've been an adjunct professor for ten years now, and I've seen both types. It all depends on how persistent they are and whether they truly want to succeed.

 

Two years ago I had two homeschooled students in the classroom who sat together. One had graduated and one was a 17 y.o. dual enrollment. Both had never taken a closed book test before, and stayed after to ask me about studying before the first exam. One got a "C" and was very distressed, but made appointments with me to go step-by-step to learn how to study. I spent several sessions with her teaching her how to pick the highlights from the book and drill herself. She ended up with an "A" in the course. The other got an "F" and basically shut down. She refused help at every turn, and basically sat like a rock for the rest of the semester and proceeded to bomb every assignment. In her course evaluation she gave me the lowest possible score on every category and wrote that I made the course "too hard."

 

Personally, I'm pretty tough on my kids when in comes to homeschooling because of my college teaching. You'll always have gaps, but I want them to at least be ready for the work load and familiar with the material their freshman year. I was ready for college-level writing, math, science, and foriegn languages, but I nearly failed my freshman history and Bible classes because I wasn't ready for the amount of detail and analysis they required.

[Gwen in VA]

Not all colleges are created equal. The harder-to-get-into colleges require a more rigorous high school background, so if your child wants to go to an "elite" school the curriculum you use really does matter!

[Miss Marple]

So do you think the rigor of the high school text is more important to the admission process or to the actual success in the school?

 

Is the actual volume and substance of the content the necessary factor or is it the ability to learn to do hard things? Or is it some magical combination of the two?

 

My 3rd son talks about going to MIT one day to invent new weaponry (apologies to the pacifists on the board :-), but I cannot see him being admitted no matter what curriculum we use because he just doesn't want to work hard with any of his curriculum. He has visions of grandeur, but is steeped in mediocrity.

Edited January 7, 2009 by CynthiaOK

[Gwen in VA]

I would say BOTH --

 

So do you think the rigor of the high school text is more important to the admission process or to the actual success in the school?

 

Is the actual volume and substance of the content the necessary factor or is it the ability to learn to do hard things? Or is it some magical combination of the two?

 

For many people, I don't think you can separate the substance of the stuff learned and the ability to do hard things. Facing academic challenges in high school is a great way to learn how to do hard things -- especially academic "hard things"!

 

And rigor of high school texts is important BOTH to the admissions process (for selective schools) AND to actual success in college for many (but not all) students.

 

Can you be successful despite a poor high school education? Absolutely! But why would we handicap our kids and make life harder for them if we can help them along in life by providing them with a stronger high school education?

 

JMHO!

[Jane in NC]

This is an interesting thread.

 

Like Cynthia, my willingness to work in college led to my success. I skipped my senior year of high school, hence did not have as many high school credits in math, science and foreign language as some other students entering college. Ultimately I graduated Summa Cum Laude so I think that I can argue that not having those challenging senior level courses did not harm my performance.

 

But I did not attend an elite college.

 

One of my son's friends is skipping his senior year of home school studies and has been applying directly to colleges. He has been accepted at his number one choice, a competitive LAC, on the basis of his portfolio. They chose not to do AP, not to take loads of tests. He has been doing challenging course work including a dual enrollment course at an Ivy League university. He was on a team that won an international science competition. He is involved in performing arts. He has demonstrated that the route to an education does not always involve traditional text books and standardized tests. But, boy, does this kid have drive and composure.

 

I think that we have wanted to create an education for my son that covers all bases. First, there are our definitions of what is important in an education. For us, this involves Latin, hard core Mathematics, Great Books, History and Science outside of textbooks. I feel a need to justify some of those "mommy grades" and thus had my son do an AP course and SAT subject exam (biology) in 10th. It seemed that our labs were lacking, so we are turning to the CC to finish out science which not only provides better labs but someone else's evaluation of my son's work.

 

The onus is on me, it seems. If my son is denied entry to a competitive institution because he did not do challenging course work, the fault is mine. He is responsible for test scores, performance during interviews, essays, etc., although I can certainly provide guidance in the process. The competitive schools know that not every child has access to the same courses or opportunities. They want to see kids who have maximized the experiences that are available to them.

 

That said, it seems futile to use books that over a student's head just for the purpose of resume building. If a particular text or curriculum resonates with the student and allows them a greater understanding, perhaps that is the better choice. But I won't cave because it is easier on me or him. I agree with Gwen that we need to teach our students how to do "hard things". Our children learn perseverance in part by observing their role models. While I know that we must all choose our battles, it seems that lessons in perseverance are often lost for the sake of convenience.

 

Jane

[Miss Marple]

Thanks for all the thoughts, ladies. I probably best fit in the camp that the best preparation (rigorous) with a motivated student gives the best outcome. Unfortunately unmotivated young teen boys can cause one to seriously doubt whether anything will be successful. But we continue to plug away and I now have one success (in my opinion) to look back on and realize that the hard things really do help. But I do see that more rigorous texts in some courses might have been a good idea. Thankfully concurrent enrollment really helped prepare the oldest for what he would encounter at the university.

 

We deal with issues of rigor in curriculum every year in our co-op. Many parents think they can emulate the success of another family just by choosing the same curricula. Others think that their kids are just naturally gifted and can do anything they put their mind to, only to find that they cannot gain admission to the better state schools (as opposed to the community colleges). We are trying to prepare a packet of information for our homeschooling parents which will address these topics - and your answers will help us prepare *our* answers.

 

Thanks again

[danielle]

When we first began hsing nearly 7 years ago, the main question I asked myself was, what do I think it is important to learn? Altho I have certainly geared my dd to be able to apply to an "elite" college, if she doesn't, if she decides to be a chef, if she decides to work for a social service or peace organization, whatever, I still want her to have the best education I can give her.

 

At least as I understand it, at least with "elite" admissions, no admissions officer is going to screen each and every one of our texts. It's not going to really matter whether we used Life of Fred or Dolciani. It WILL matter what the dc scored on the SAT Math or ACT, what the SAT II and/or AP scores were, and what unique "selling points" the dc can bring to the school. I mean, how long do we think that admissions really scrutinize the first round? 5 minutes? If your app makes it out of the pile, maybe then closer scrutiny--essays about what dc has actually studied, recommendations, etc. There are thousands of textbook series out of there--I can guarantee we know way more about them than any admissions officer. Now, admittedly, things might be different at small, private, or non competitive colleges, but if that is what your dc is looking at, it's best to contact the college and review their requirements when first planning high school. As Steven Covey has said, "Begin with the end in mind."

 

I say, use the most rigorous materials and methods that your child can learn from--whether it's Thinkwell or drawing with a stick in the sand. The more rigor, the more options. JMHO

Danielle