Kindercare (Minneapolis, Plymouth, Maple Grove: neighborhood, top school, calculated)
Minneapolis - St. PaulTwin Cities
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why do I have to keep explaining things to you? You said I didn't see the "big picture." I have relocated my family and have children who are older than yours, two phases of your life that you are now just entering. Having completed those phases, I actually see more of the "big picture" this than you understand is out there. I know that it is not your exact situation, but I do understand the "big picture."
All that said, I don't think focusing on being the "top" student or getting the highest SAT score are representative of true learning, either. .
We agree. But like it or not, doors open if you accomplish those SAT scores, class rank, GPA, etc. I don't advocate avoiding risks so that you get a specific class rank. It's good to stretch yourself. You can take risks and finish close to the top.
Well it's official. Your Kid's school is doing a great job. My Kid bounces between #1and #2 out of 550 student. In 11th and 12th grade he was full time college. At age 17, he is a science college tutor. I suspect he can get in most colleges but we are aiming for free.
So now I understand why acedemics is focused at your school: it's visual and the parents and students are tying their self esteem to the GPA and rank JUST like scoring goals or making a team. Congrats!
My Kid will sit alphabetically with the other 50 students. The ACT scores will never will be mentioned. The scholarships will only be visual to the group that receives them. I'm not complaining other than as a society, China and India sure care about their grades. It seems most Kid's are not looking over their shoulders.
Ok, so what is it-either a school can focus on academic achievement or they can't?? It isn't "visual", it it about recognizing the achievement of these STUDENTS .
My kids chose to stay IN high school and not take full-time college classes. There is a lot to high school besides classes and we don't WANT them missing out. They are only kids once and it goes so fast.
As for the ACT prep classes, plenty of kids get a 36 the first time without taking a class. MN had close to 200 kids score a 36 on the ACT last year. We have a senior this year that got a perfect score the first time but he took the prep class at our school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
Wow, Golfgal's example certainly doesn't sound healthy, either. I don't think ACT/SAT scores are any of the school's business, and all this focus on test scores would scare me away from a school. And a focus on competition seems to distract from a collaborative, helpful learning atmosphere, doesn't it? (and it's just creepy that parents would always know who the "top" ten kids are at a school are at any given time, either!)
Our local school did (and does) have an annual senior awards night, where scholarships are awarded and where students are singled out for special department honors. Those who go for the IB Diploma have their names up on the wall, and there's definitely plenty of recognition for those who do excel academically. And yes, I did read this year's local list of National Merit Finalists, which was widely reported in local papers. It is most definitely "cool" to be smart and accomplished, but on the other hand, I don't think there's a culture where kids (or their parents!!) are always judging others, trying to make sure their kid has a higher GPA than their peers, or looking down on others who may be struggling.
Creepy how--it's published in the program for the awards ceremony and posted online. It is also often written up in the newspaper. See, we live in a community and the community supports the schools. They like to read about how the kids are doing in school, sports, etc. It's isn't creepy at all, it's called living in a community.
I don't know where you get that our school is focused on ACT scores--I was just giving examples to miss no schools like academics? ACT scores ARE the school's business since it is an indicator of how well they are preparing kids for those exams and for college. All of the scores are reported by ACT to the schools and they always have been. I think it is fantastic that the teachers and administration at our schools care that the kids get good scores on the ACT's. Not only does that help with college acceptance rates but it is also important for scholarships.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1stpontiac
Not really. Sure, if the school had a live scoreboard on their website that said "Today's GPA leaders are: (1) Joey, (2) Brad, (3) Golfgal Jr. ...." that would be creepy. But if a school or community newspaper publishes who won a National Merit contest, who won a scholarship, and who made the honor roll, and (probably the biggest indicator) you listen to your kids and their friends talk about their classes, its not that hard to be tuned into who the top students are.
I would also bet that GG was using a bit of hyperbole and that she likely doesn't know the EXACT top 10 students and their individual ranking in each class.
Actually, I could look up on the school website and see the names from last year's awards ceremony and who is top 10. See above. And you are right, the kids know who the top kids are in the class, the kids do talk about those things. It is on their report cards each trimester what their class rank is--which is helpful for the college application process.
I find it creepy if you DIDN'T know who the class leaders where in your child's school actually.
It sounded like you had the list of top students memorized, and yes, I thought that was rather weird. I know we also have different educational philosophies, but I also find it disturbing when parents focus so much on grades; I think it diminishes all the other factors, and condenses everything into one number. I also hate grade ranking; who cares if student X has a higher GPA than student Y? That kind of competition seems -- to me -- to hurt a sense of community, rather than enhance it. It risks becoming one big status game where it's about competition and being better than others, rather than encouraging all students to thrive and to seek their own personal best. Then again, I tend to fall along the Alfie Kohn school of thought, and think that focus on grades and external incentives can harm true learning, and I know (from previous threads) that you and I have VERY different opinions on that. And, to be fair, I know kids do thrive in different environments. Some kids (and perhaps their parents) need the external motivation to do well, while in others that push may backfire and create the kinds of students who care a lot about doing well on tests, but not necessarily out in the "real" world.
I wasn't suggesting that the schools shouldn't care about ACT scores, but I think a student's ACT or SAT score should be private, and not something bantered about in the community at large. Then again (despite doing very well myself; I'm good at tests) I also don't like all the general focus on SATs to begin with, an opinion that is shared by an increasing number of colleges. Anything that seeks to distill education or level of learning into a simple number is something that we, as communities, should be rejecting. (especially since, for the most part, ACT and SAT scores mostly just show the socioeconomic status of a kid, not how smart or accomplished they are, and not how well a school has or has not prepared them for college.)
Overall though, yes, I do still find it creepy if parents are paying such close attention to the grades of his or her child's peers that they can cite the list of those with the best grades. It suggests a level of competitiveness that I don't find to be attractive. Then again, I've mostly lived in communities where we've had many, many highly competent students, and focusing on the top ten as the "best" would leave out a lot of wonderful, very accomplished students.
It sounded like you had the list of top students memorized, and yes, I thought that was rather weird. I know we also have different educational philosophies, but I also find it disturbing when parents focus so much on grades; I think it diminishes all the other factors, and condenses everything into one number. I also hate grade ranking; who cares if student X has a higher GPA than student Y? That kind of competition seems -- to me -- to hurt a sense of community, rather than enhance it. It risks becoming one big status game where it's about competition and being better than others, rather than encouraging all students to thrive and to seek their own personal best. Then again, I tend to fall along the Alfie Kohn school of thought, and think that focus on grades and external incentives can harm true learning, and I know (from previous threads) that you and I have VERY different opinions on that. And, to be fair, I know kids do thrive in different environments. Some kids (and perhaps their parents) need the external motivation to do well, while in others that push may backfire and create the kinds of students who care a lot about doing well on tests, but not necessarily out in the "real" world.
I wasn't suggesting that the schools shouldn't care about ACT scores, but I think a student's ACT or SAT score should be private, and not something bantered about in the community at large. Then again (despite doing very well myself; I'm good at tests) I also don't like all the general focus on SATs to begin with, an opinion that is shared by an increasing number of colleges. Anything that seeks to distill education or level of learning into a simple number is something that we, as communities, should be rejecting. (especially since, for the most part, ACT and SAT scores mostly just show the socioeconomic status of a kid, not how smart or accomplished they are, and not how well a school has or has not prepared them for college.)
Overall though, yes, I do still find it creepy if parents are paying such close attention to the grades of his or her child's peers that they can cite the list of those with the best grades. It suggests a level of competitiveness that I don't find to be attractive. Then again, I've mostly lived in communities where we've had many, many highly competent students, and focusing on the top ten as the "best" would leave out a lot of wonderful, very accomplished students.
College admissions officers---and I don't think it hurts the community at all-kids are happy for their friends when they are doing so well--just like they are happy when the quarterback throws an amazing pass or the captain of the basketball team beats the buzzer to win a game, etc.
Who pays "close" attention. I could tell you off hand who is #1 in our kids' class because she is a friend of our DD's. I can tell you who is #1 in the sophomore class because DD dated him last year--I couldn't OFF HAND tell you anyone else on the list-the rest I would have to look up on the website. The point was, the other poster was saying that schools lacked focus on grades, I was giving examples of how she was wrong. When your 4 year old is 16 and looking at colleges like our kids are right now, you will care about these things...or at least your checkbook will care.
Our school mimics your 2nd paragraph. If you are Kid is happy with Mankato for instance, there is NOTHING wrong with that. It's a great school.
But competition on every level has it's pro's and con's. Athletes are being judged on the field and totem poled for years. By the time high school rolls around, I think it's healthy for people to "judge" a Kid's performance. It will happen in the working world. I'm in favor of getting students to achieve at a higher level.
The reality is the bar is being raised at all levels and we are now competing (for our lives) in several industries. We currently have 25% of the worlds wealth with 4.5% of the population. That's changing in front of our eyes. Get use to it.
Considering that my former school is one of the best in the state, that many of my fellow students went to big name schools, that we produced (and continue to every year) many National Merit finalists, I think my school's experience was just fine. I think you'd have a difficult time pointing to the school and suggesting that the students are NOT "achieving at a higher level." They ARE. And nothing wrong with Mankato, but none of my friends there. Think Carleton, Harvard, Smith, Kenyon, Brown, Sarah Lawrence, MIT, etc.; in other words, a pretty good range of schools. I went to the U (most of my tuition covered through merit scholarships), but turned down an unsolicited full-ride scholarship to another school, as well as near full-rides at other colleges. In other words, you'd be hard-pressed to make any kind of argument that my former high school is not producing kids who can compete against the best and brightest out there. It's also a school that focuses more on academics than on sports, but also strives to be inclusive when it comes to those academic honors; some kids are inevitably singled out, but the goal is not to pit kids against one another, but to help each kid work to the best of his or her abilities.
In contrast, one of my former college roommates was the valedictorian at her high school (a smaller local suburb). Apparently the school wasn't in the same academic league, and she was used to coasting by and being the "smart one." She got to college and had major problems adjusting to being one of many, many smart kids. She thought of it as a competition, and really suffered as a result. I grew up in an environment surrounded by MANY smart kids, and instead of seeing it as one big competition, enjoyed the support that comes from that. After all, we're not all smart at the same things, and -- despite being a loner and never one for group projects and the like -- thrive in an environment where smart is the norm, where one's success is not measured by something as one-sided as a number (do we REALLY think that GPA shows the full educational story?), and where it was okay to ALL be smart and successful (albeit successful in different ways). Sure, I know about competition; I attended a highly selective graduate school, and knew full-well that my odds of getting in were slim. I did get in, but am now contemplating finishing up at a PhD program with even smaller odds of admittance. But I also know that my GPA and test scores are not by themselves going to get me into that program or bring me success.
I'm all for evaluating a student's performance, but reducing it to GPA and test scores is not EDUCATING a student, or doing anything relevant to actually judge them. This one of the reasons so many of my friends in academia are concerned; once the kids get to them they are used to working to the test (or to their parents' expectations); they don't have the internal drive or willingness to take some creative risks. Testing well is not the key to success in a global economy. The kids have to learn how to THINK and be willing to work without someone telling them exactly what to do. I've seen it on college campuses myself. We need to raise kids who have the capacity to think for themselves, who have the internal drive to succeed, who have both the skills and the creativity to succeed even when someone isn't right there telling them what to do.
College admissions officers---and I don't think it hurts the community at all-kids are happy for their friends when they are doing so well--just like they are happy when the quarterback throws an amazing pass or the captain of the basketball team beats the buzzer to win a game, etc.
Who pays "close" attention. I could tell you off hand who is #1 in our kids' class because she is a friend of our DD's. I can tell you who is #1 in the sophomore class because DD dated him last year--I couldn't OFF HAND tell you anyone else on the list-the rest I would have to look up on the website. The point was, the other poster was saying that schools lacked focus on grades, I was giving examples of how she was wrong. When your 4 year old is 16 and looking at colleges like our kids are right now, you will care about these things...or at least your checkbook will care.
Well, you did suggest that you could cite the top ten list. I think having a general idea is one thing, reciting them by heart is what I found weird. Obviously you don't really know all ten in order off the top of your head, which is much more reasonable.
I agree that most schools are focused on academics over sports. I often have problems when grades become the focus rather than learning (because one does not automatically equate the other), but I tend to agree with you that most schools definitely DO put core academics above athletics. And that it's possible to be both a top scholar as well as to be an athlete, artist, etc.
Entertaining thread. I'm learning quite a bit about what my future may hold when my children are older and in high school. UU and MN-Born, I appreciate your balanced and objective take on things. My stomach hurts after reading some of the posts from some of the more proliferate contributors. I'm not sure if that's from laughing or from the idea that I might find myself "sitting in the bleachers" with such folks in the future.
My kids chose to stay IN high school and not take full-time college classes. There is a lot to high school besides classes and we don't WANT them missing out. They are only kids once and it goes so fast.
.
Not going offsite to a full time college in 11th and 12th grade is a personal decision. For my son, his "high school experience" is mostly related to the three sports he is involved in. He still goes to pep fests, school games, plays etc. Therefore as parents we too were at the evening school events at least twice a week. It was transparent to us but there still was a small sacrifice to get the total "high school experience". But fulltime college in 11th and 12th grade also had some key advantages (experience wise) for him personally as well.
District 11 went to a trimester system. Making PSEO work was impossible. PSEO doesn't have engineering classes either. Instead, he "recruited" his friends to join him at his PSEO college. As parents, we shared the trade-offs with other parents and in the end, he is with 10 of his high school friends all full time PSEO students. Some have done extremely well and a couple others were not mature enough to handle the freedom and rigor.
Taking all generals in PSEO was a big mistake for my daughter for other reasons if the goal was to save money. PSEO caused her to be loaded up on the sciences after (full time PSEO). She opted to fill in other classes that interested her so she will have 6 years of college (biology and business). So we didn't save any college money but the business classes will help her as a Dentist in future years. For my Son, he is taking as much science classes as possible and saving the easier classes when he exists high school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfgal
[b]
As for the ACT prep classes, plenty of kids get a 36 the first time without taking a class. MN had close to 200 kids score a 36 on the ACT last year. We have a senior this year that got a perfect score the first time but he took the prep class at our school.
.
While the ACT test is not "hard" per say. That's because all of the material is in fact high school material. But taking tests fast enough for how questions they ask is a challenge. For instance you get 60 minutes for 60 math questions. Many take longer than a minute. Some very smart kids who take tests fast will do very well. therefore the ACT prep class would not help. All they need to do is look at the problems they got wrong (by buying the test and answers back from ACT). My daughter tests fast while my analytical son tests slower than averagee. Hence the ACT prep class was helpful. It was not needed to get into any MN schools as his default ACT was 29 before the class. But the average ACT score in Harvard was 33 and even higher for Sanford. In the end, the classes helped a lot and he got in the school of his choice.
Getting a 36 on your ACT is an extreme accomplishment. In 2011, 1,623,112 students took the ACT. A total of 704 got a 36. That's 0.0433% of the students!! That seems kinda special to me. I don't think MN received 25% off of the countries perfect scores. That is improbable. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACT_(test)
Last edited by MN-Born-n-Raised; 11-05-2011 at 04:48 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.