Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion more on "Tiger Mom"...

I actually do think their kids are just as worthwhile as mine.

What makes me sad is that their own parents don't seem to notice that they are great just the way they are. It's awful when a stranger or acquaintance is more willing to accept you and treasure you for your own inherent worth than mom and dad, YK? My heart just breaks for some of those kids-- real kids that we really know.

No, they are too busy fluffing up junior's vitae, exhorting them to do MORE-MORE-MORE and trying to minimize what my DD is doing, has done, or is capable of doing... to even notice that their kids are nice, ideally intelligent, and have quirky and awesome interests that they ought to be celebrating rather than complaining that they aren't winning medals in academic competitions, or relentlessly practicing the violin. If that is a criticism of the hyper-parenting that is common locally, then I stand by it.

Like I said-- I see this entire arms race as being PROFOUNDLY toxic. For all of us. Because if those parents succeed at what they seem to be aiming at, I really fear for our future.

I don't have to do all of those things to my child, and she still looks extraordinary. Shouldn't everyone be glad that there are kids like my DD??

I'm certainly glad that there are kids with extraordinary musical or athletic ability, after all-- I don't minimize their accomplishments or make rationalizations for how MY kid could/should be as good as that, too... I view those kids as natural wonders of nature or something, and I think it's lovely for us all that they exist.

Just sad. The whole thing is just sad.

There is a long history of SAT items being added and removed. Whether this is "good" or "bad" is debatable. Analogies were replaced with additional reading comprehension passages. The Writing Section is similar to the Test of Standard Written English (TSWE) that was on the SATs from the mid-1970s to mid-1990s. I recall the TSWE but no one cared about it (I think you really had to bomb it for any colleges to care).

Even now, colleges don't care that much about the Writing Section. Some do not even consider it, and most others do not give it the weight that math and verbal (Critical Reading) are given. Almost all merit scholarships are based upon the M+V score out of 1600.

While no test is a perfect measure of ability or potential, colleges need to have some way to compare the applicants. Grading systems and standards vary a lot from school to school, so grades alone cannot be used (there are "test optional" colleges these days, but many kids still submit the test scores). While the SAT is probably more "coachable" now than it ever has been, there is really only so much coaching you can do.

The kids I see that have really good SAT scores (say 2200+) are very bright/gifted. I won't say it can't happen, but it would be a very rare case to take a kid with a 1500 score and coach them to a 2200. For most kids, no matter how hard they try, a 2200 is just not possible.

So yes, there are kids with perfect or near perfect scores who are not PG. However, I don't think that the "elite" colleges were ever on a mission to serve just PG kids. While I think there should be less weight given to sports and other hooks, I also think that these schools would prefer an MG/HG kid who is very involved in sports, music, community service, etc. over a PG kid who is not involved with any activities. (Not saying that PG kids don't do other stuff - I certainly know some who are involved in tons of stuff, and average kids who do nothing outside of school). I truly think that there are MG kids that can benefit from an "elite" college education.

Investment banks and other high-paying employers hire preferentially at top-ranked colleges. Some mildly gifted kids could have lucrative careers there *if they are recruited and hired to begin with*. Therefore it may be individually rational for parents to push their kids to get into the most selective schools, and studies find that high school seniors tend to choose the most prestigious college they were accepted to.

Ross Douthat has explained another function of the most selective schools

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-secrets-of-princeton.html
The Secrets of Princeton
New York Times
April 6, 2013

Fewer people articulate my views than act on them in their personal lives .

Absolutely, NotSoGifted. I'm not so elitist that I think that. Though I do think that we've jumped the shark in suggesting that all high school kids should take AP courses, and that all people should obtain college degrees...

No, absolutely bright/MG/high motivation people should be in the running for elite educational opportunity. No question.



I just think that the more honest thing to do is to raise the ceiling so that ability is the limiting factor.


As it stands now, even the most elite schools on the planet don't have a WAY to select for PG/EG applicants even if they wanted to do so.

Bostonian, it's a matter of degree of pushing, I think.

I see parents who PUNISH their children for not bringing home A's in honors math classes, and who threaten to take away 'fun' extracurriculars for standardized test scores below the 98th percentile. Seriously.

For those kinds of kids (I'd guess 95th-97th percentile, probably) I think this sort of thing is toxic. It results in what you noted in a previous post-- a LOT of stress-responses, even depression and suicide risk.

*Money* is more of a limiting factor.

As a MG person that got excellent college education that helped me contribute to society in a positive way, I 100% Agree. I was just thinking about how to write the same thought without ruffling feathers, and you did it! Thanks!

I have no problem seeing ceilings raised to generate meaningful variability in the tails of test takers as long as non-test factors capturing "soft skills", like motivation and persistence, are still weighted heavily in admissions decisions. Ability alone cannot accurately predict the contribution a student will make to the university and society at large. For evidence, I simply point to the lawyers of the world.

I'd also like to see nationality quotas on admissions to elite private universities eliminated, because it unduly penalizes smart foreigners.

Absolutely!!

I only want for motivation and ability to stop being conflated with push-parenting (which mostly does not correlate particularly well with college success, and in fact, could arguably lead to a lot of hassle and expense for colleges that find they need to 'remediate' or 'support' students in those situations).

Motivation is huge, and those students SHOULD be taken into account. It'd be a lot easier if grade inflation weren't so rampant, honestly, because transcripts used to reflect that quality extremely well, and not-so-much anymore.

On SAT cheating, it is not limited to Asian countries. There was a big crackdown on Long Island last year.

Back to Howler's comment that her friends are envious of her child, doesn't the current system, allowing for extracurriculars to be taken into account, let all types of kids shine. Maybe they wouldn't be so envious if their kid was a ping pong champ and got into Harvard as a result.

So Howler, it may be a good thing. They would be happy with their kids.