http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/sto...nnsylvania-runner-showed-only-part-story

The loss is tragic, however it is not clear from the article whether she was "gifted", in the context of this forum. The article mentions perfectionism and depression, but the only reference to being gifted is related to others' misattribution of her track prowess - others being unaware of how much practice went into her athletic performance:
Persons concerned with suicide amongst the gifted may wish to read about the impetus for founding SENG.

Many insightful articles are found with a search for "suicide" on the Davidson Database.

Well, she had a 3.5 at Penn her first semester, as a college athlete. I think it unlikely that she was *not* gifted in the context of this forum.

The point is very well-made that for the younger generation of people-- particularly young women-- the IMAGE of perfection that social media bombards them with is a powerful, narcotic, and TOXIC force.

Those with perfectionistic children should read that very sobering and heartbreaking account.

I know kids like that girl. So does my DD.

I see echoes of what my DD and her friends have gone through in their first year at Uni in that write-up. It's very troubling.



Colleges may know that they have a "suicide problem" but precious few of them are doing much to stem the tide.

THIS is the ultimate destination on the college-admissions crazy train. I firmly believe that. NO kind of real-life experience can possibly match the expectations that are generated along that route. The pressure placed on college entrants now is downright scary.

Never forget that no matter how talented, how gifted-- teenagers are really still so young, in so many ways. They are still children, and we're (meaning as a culture) placing a pretty heavy burden on them, and then reinforcing it with social media and the subscription to college admissions mania. Think about what that admissions game is like now-- truly think about it. NOTHING is ever "enough" and kids as young as-- well, even some of the early elementary kids whose parents are here, for example-- are already into "managing" their children's resumes for this purpose. We do so by editing what they show the world of themselves-- by picking and choosing those things which show them to best advantage, the closest to "perfect" that can be presented as a collage, with all of the less-stellar and average (or, heaven forbid, below average) bits edited OUT. Think about super-scoring, even, for an example of what I'm driving at there.

We've managed their growing up years by grooming them to APPEAR always at their best, emphasized high performance to them, ensured that all is "within reach" all of the time both academically and otherwise, meaning that success or failure is ALWAYS a matter of personal effort or ability. Their lives are engineered to teach them that perfect is both attainable-- and REQUIRED. That if they don't achieve at high levels, it's a failure and that it's because of something wrong with THEM, since, after all, their lives are often engineered so that this is fundamentally more or less TRUE.

Then they enter college and it just isn't so. The most capable and insightful among them are the most prone to unraveling at that point, because existential dissonance is so extreme for them in particular. That gap has grown a LOT larger than it was in the 1960's-1990's when their parents were growing up.

No wonder a few pithy "it's okay" platitudes and 40 minutes once a week with a counselor that grew up in another era don't do much for this problem.

College used to be a great way to "figure it all out" and to grow up. NOW, we expect them to have (somehow) done all of that exploration* before they get there.

Nobody can really expect to graduate in 4y if they don't:
1) go in with preexisting credits (that way you can get priority registration** so that you can get INTO the classes you need), and

2) already know what they intend as a college major.

The general education core at US institutions now leaves very few credits to play around with along the way to finding your passion.

In talking with other parents of kids this age-- a shocking number of them are going into college without knowing what they want to get out of it, and many without any idea what they want to major in, even. The entire focus has been on Getting Into a Fabulous College. Winning! (As JonLaw might put it).


Then no magical Disney moment happens-- they don't suddenly KNOW by virtue of arrival on a college campus. Not knowing-- how can they possibly have motivation to work that hard for something that doesn't even exist in their minds? Then they experience failure as a result of the gap in their preparation versus the new demands upon them (and for some of them, it's the first time). And because they've been conditioned to hide imperfections-- they can't or won't tell anyone.

All of this LOOKS very much like generalized anxiety or garden variety depression, of course-- and on some level I suppose that it is. But I'd characterize it as an existential crisis instead. The response isn't an irrational one given the inputs they have: a) I must be perfect, b) I can no longer be perfect, c) it doesn't even matter what I do and I have no time/energy/information to consider it anyway, and d) I can't get out of this.

Sorry if I sound bitter here-- it's just that this system is SO broken-- and it's broken from absolutely top to bottom.


* Of course, this is incompatible with the production of a stellar and focused RESUME, which means heavy editing and polishing to the point of outright fabrication in some instances... or accepting that Very Elite College isn't where you're bound, which is intolerable as that means Failure Writ Large.


** The other routes to priority registration are team athletics or a disability waiver. FYI.

If one considers college admissions as a self-advocacy effort whose goal is to find the best (or least worst) "fit," then collecting documentation through the years may provide a clear picture of one's interests, pursuits, passion(s), and strengths (both for self-awareness and also to present one's self to an institution for their consideration as to whether they perceive a "match")... then it may be a low-key, stress-free, stepwise approach to preparing for that self-advocacy. Parents often may help collect such documentation when children are young, and ideally a child gradually takes ownership of this process as they develop their interests, independence, organizational abilities, and sense of self-determination.

Some may say that success or failure may also be a matter of perspective, resiliency, ability to learn from mistakes, and/or growth mindset (as opposed to fixed mindset).

Some may say this not related to LOG per se, but rather related to preparation such as prior experience handling challenges and overcoming them, learning from mistakes, developing "grit," achieving personal goals, valuing their personal best (as opposed to fluctuating in self-esteem by frequent comparison with others), striving for balance, and cultivating a long-term perspective.

Just the title of this thread made me shudder and hesitate before opening it to read it.

The sudden shock of actual challenge for the first time in her life with a scholarship on the line too cannot have helped.

This was a local story here with my DD one day heading to the same high school so this struck a chord with me.

Dad shares that high school was too easy for her...

This has reaffirmed my resolve to keep my DD challenged.

My high school son says most of his high school classes are too easy-- some content, some pace, some both. No clue how to fix it for him.

My elementary school son said the other day that he should have just attended the even years (k,2, and 4) and skipped all the odd...any resulting gaps would have finally made something hard. What does one say to that and how does one make sure middle school isn't the same.

Following on Howler's commentary about a lack of direction in university, children are streamlined to such a degree into activities that are CV-enhancing that they miss out on the opportunity to explore true interests, read widely, experience downtime, think, and meet people from a variety of walks of life. Finding one's life path comes from the lived experience, not some hermetically sealed vacuum tube connected to an Ivy with an on-ramp at grade 1 (or earlier!) They're driving toward some arbitrary goal with absolutely no perspective on what it contributes to society or themselves. It's terribly sad.

On a more personal note, this story struck me deeply. There is a history of depression in DS' extended family, and of giftedness on both sides. I am actively trying to create an environment for DS where he will have the supports and role models he needs to develop a healthy internal monologue and life habits as he grows up. I want to consciously model struggle and failure around personally meaningful goals to him as he grows up so that he learns how people--even outwardly successful ones-- pick up the pieces of a shattered dream, be it personal or professional, and pivot toward a new path.

I fully plan to have DH and I share with him our personal and professional failures when appropriate. He needs to know that marriage, work, health (physical, mental, spiritual) are the product of grit, struggle, and learning. When the passion in any of these areas inevitably wanes, success boils down to a sequence of small habits repeated consistently over time that center on a guiding set of values.

I wonder how Madison's story might have been different if her parents had encouraged her strongly to withdraw for a semester (or longer) to regroup or to significantly reduce her courseload, not just transfer. I wonder if she would have felt so trapped if someone had told her that she could scale back until she found her comfort zone. She might well have learned the ropes after a few months and been able to happily sustain her load with a more gentle easing into university. I had a humdinger of a first semester at university as a young matriculant taking extra credits and starting in second year (thankfully I had the presence of mind--or lack of intestinal fortitude-- not to do varsity fencing, which required 30 hours of training per week!). I needed to learn how to live in a new environment that presented some challenge before thriving, eventually with a relatively low level of effort again. It was a season that passed quickly, and I suspect Madison could have experienced similar success if she had been allowed to admit she was overburdened and unhappy.

Aquinas--

Probably would have made little difference. When kids are offered full scholarships, there are strings attached. A lot of them.

If you drop to 'part time' you forfeit the scholarship. It will go away, and likely never be reinstated (back of the line, basically).

This is the problem with a huge merit scholarship, by the way. For example, DD would be considered "full time" at 12 hours per term. However, for the purposes of her scholarship, she MUST maintain 15 (minimum) for each term of her freshman year, and her gpa must stay above 3.25 in order to maintain her placement. Her incoming credits don't get averaged-- so kids like her, they start that freshman year with nothing in the gpa bank. One class that turns out with a C (which happened to my DD, by the way), winds up ratcheting metaphorical thumbscrews and making them reconsider their majors in a HURRY.

Add that kind of pressure to the ordinary transition-year pressures (such as they are now) and it's easy to see why this can become a crushing burden.

Walking away from an award like that is easier said than done. This is big money, in a lot of cases. Maybe 50K, 100K-- or more. Do you really tell your kid "okay, let's try that if you think it might help" when you don't really KNOW what the problem is?

Well said.

Unfortunately it appears that renewable annual merit scholarships might not be renewed for a number of students:
U.S.News & World Report - Education, 5 Big Financial Aid Lies, by Kim Clark, April 6, 2010 Possibly in addition to a "Net Price Calculator", college websites ought to be required to reveal a 5-year history of student financial aid statistics including, where applicable, renewal rates of merit scholarships.

Excellent idea, that.


In addition, I'd also argue that colleges should be forced to discuss mental health problems among their student populations.

I think that there is a sense that students' mental health difficulties are preexisting, or that they develop inevitably, in a sort of bubble that belongs to the student, and this is simply not the case in a lot of disorders.


Stress is a known trigger for a great many mental health disorders that emerge in late adolescence and young adulthood. Those are some serious conditions (some of them potentially fatal, as this tragic story demonstrates)-- and parents who want to know what a college has (for real) as a track record for managing the known rate of such emergence should be able to find it. That is not currently the case.

Rates of addiction, arrest, etc. are also information that parents and prospective students should have at hand, too. Such things can paint a realistic picture of what the level of student support versus crushing stress and isolation looks like on any given campus.

This generation seems fine-- better than fine-- on the surface. But I've known quite a few kids like this girl, and when you know a half dozen or more kids who graduate near the top of their classes, are seemingly motivated, have a bunch of merit aid, and still go off to college only to come home in less than a full year, shattered emotionally-- something is very wrong.

These are kids who came from homes like those of the members here, by the way. GOOD homes. Not homes where these kids were overly helicoptered or Tigered or anything. It's mystifying to me on some level. They are for some reason feeling a level of anxiety and stress over their performance that previous generations simply did not.

Law schools have been doing this sort of thing for a while, too. I see it as being the educational equivalent of a bait-and-switch routine. The colleges know that a big chunk of merit scholarship kids will lose the funding and become revenue sources who will be reluctant to pull out of the college.

The financial aid people should be obligated to tell the kids not only what percentage of scholarships are lost at the end of each year (x% of ending freshmen, etc,) but also what's required on average to retain the required GPA --- by subject area. So that might be, "40+ hours a week outside of 20 hours of classes classes and labs for STEM, 30+ for humanities outside of class time, etc. And if you major in theater, prepare to sacrifice many weekends working as an unpaid lighting/sound/backstage lackey during dress rehearsals and performance days and nights."

Coming from a continental European perspective where unis will let you succeed or fail on your own without the least bit of pressure but with hearty indifference, I was quite surprised even in the nineties coming to a high pressure place (in the UK) and witnessing (and experiencing) the effects on mental health in the students around me and myself. I knew a number of kids on junior year abroad from a very high pressure LAC in the US and was rather shocked at the workload over and above even what kids had in the UK, including paid work and horrible budget pressures, and the amount of sleep deprivation that was considered normal.
I get these obsessive interests and on of these during the last few years has been the compound effects of chronic stress, lack of outdoor time, bad nutrition and chronic sleep deprivation. And recently, I have become interested in higher education in the US.
The workload and pressure teenagers are being placed under even in high school, and the sleep deprivation that is expected as a matter of course, are staggering, and colleges appear even worse in that respect - and everyone seems to be PROUD of it, as a mark of rigour. Look how we're killing ourselves to get ahead.
Kids are set up for major health problems with this disruption of circadian rhythm and chronic cortisol overload, mental health immediately and cardiovascular and metabolic health later.
I read in a college guide how a student proudly declares a professor told the, to phone them up even at two in the morning if they had a problem. This is ridiculous.

This article appearing online for Time/Money, by Jacob Davidson, titled "3 Mistakes That Will Cost You a College Scholarship", dated September 3, 2014 gives a brief glimpse: between 5% to more than 40% of students lose renewable annual scholarships. Engineering, computing, and natural science students, and those with athletic scholarships are said to be less likely to retain renewable annual scholarships for all 4 years.

It would be great to have full transparency: college websites revealing a 5-year history of their student body's financial aid statistics, including retention of merit scholarships by school/discipline and scholarship type.

It is my understanding that students in the United States also succeed or fail uni on their own, so I am unclear as to what you are referring to. Would you clarify, please?

I've seen this myself. It's an issue many of my RL friends have been struggling with in their college kids. When I read this article it hits close to home as I know quite a number of young adults struggling through university with anxiety & stress. It seems almost universal among those who I know at top tier universities.

One thing I noted from the article that I see in the students I know. Most of them will accept the "top rated" school they get into irregardless of fit. I remember asking one young woman a few years back why she chose X Ivy League, and she honestly said "it was the best school I got into."

All points very well taken, Howler. I sometimes forget just how much more high-stakes the situation in higher ed is in the US versus Canada. Here, a full scholarship would be $5-10K/year in most undergrad programs. It's a LOT easier to justify and offset walking away from $20-40K (or less) than the comparable US figures.

Frankly, the decision between merit financing and mental health shouldn't be a zero sum decision. Ever. IMO, merit scholarships should come with clauses that permit temporarily lower course loads or short leaves for health related reasons. In the case of my BIL, cancer was a sufficient reason for a leave while retaining a scholarship (thankfully he's -0 years in remission!); why are other health conditions considered less pressing? It boggles the mind the extent to which mental health conditions are doubted and denigrated!

I wonder if not all of these students really understand how hard a 3.8 might be to maintain. In the U.S. system where many honors & AP classes have a +1 point. Thus many of these students have GPA's that well exceed a 4.0 in High School. In addition to calculating GPA's for H.S. typcially plus & minuses don't matter. But in college GPA's, that A-, B- is worth less points that the A or B. To maintain a 3.8, if your on a semester system taking 5 classes, you must get 4 A's and better than a B in the remaining. If any of those is an A- you drop below a 3.8.

Yes! This! And it continues, too..."best" law/med school, "best" specialty, "best" corporate firm/hospital,... until the body, mind, or both can't take the constant pressure (or the drudgery of doing something outwardly prestigious that they hate) and they snap. The brightest people are starving themselves of food, sleep, exercise, and human contact, then fail at being Perfect while operating 18+ hours/day in The Ideal Role and suddenly have a crisis of identity. Because, if they can't be superhuman, then clearly everything they thought they knew about themselves must be discarded.

And then this happens, and they feel like imposters in their own skin:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.ca/2013/05/depression-part-two.html?m=1

Not all schools LET you withdraw for a semester. Large top ranked states schools don't always allow one to withdraw without a medical reason. And once withdraw don't make it easy to get back in. And the paperwork & documentation to get a medical isn't necessary easy. They just have too many students that look good on paper to care much about those that don't keep up. Although I would expect that a private school like PENN would probably let a student withdraw for a semester.

A must-read. Thanks for sharing.

For some, the described numbing happens while gifted kids are left unaffirmed and underserved in elementary, middle, and high schools, prescribed to feel guilty or advantaged for the differences which cause their brains to be high-IQ. Some may say that parents who've advocated in futility and watched their children become numb may also succumb to the fog of meaninglessness. Not that the numbing or sense of meaninglessness necessarily remains for long, becomes all-encompassing, or leads to wishing one's self away. A change in learning environment may help. Encouraging kiddos to be self-determining, striking out on one's own path... a personally meaningful path... may, for some, bring a return to satisfaction, fulfillment, meaning, and joy.

When deciding between colleges -- it's so easy to get caught up in "where can I go for the least amount of money", especially when that amount is "basically free", but I think more kids and parents need to realize and agree that a smaller scholarship that's less stressful, or a cheaper college that's less prestigious but roughly as good educationally, or taking out student loans for a college that's a good fit...in the long run, is better than a full scholarship to an elite college requiring absolute PERFECTION with a side of stress, compromised mental health, and sleep deprivation.
I'm not saying you shouldn't look for scholarships, or that you should drown yourself in student loan debt. But you should make the choice that's right for you and compromise what you can afford with what's going to help you be a successful, healthy, happy person. In the end, a lesser-known college will still give you an education and student loan debts can be paid off, but unfortunately, cases like Madison's won't go away by themselves.
I know it's easier said than done. But we can't just accept that kids are going to be depressed, anxious, and suicidal. And if it means passing up that scholarship, so be it. And hopefully colleges will realize putting students in these situations -- where they have to choose between their health and a college scholarship, or a prestigious university -- isn't acceptable, even if it's unintentional.

Many of the elite colleges, including the Ivies, MIT, and Stanford, do not have merit scholarships. Once accepted, your expected financial contribution depends on family income.

Harvard & MIT also do not offer athletic scholarships, whereas Stanford offers athletic scholarships; I mention this detail because the OP's article told of the suicide of a student attending UPenn on an athletic scholarship. The guiding principle is the same: when choosing the best college experience, choose the most comfortable "fit", not the greatest prestige.

http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/costs-financial-aid/financial-aid-at-penn

Yes, you are correct. A quick re-read confirms that talk of scholarships was introduced not by the OP's article but rather by other posts in the thread.

I'll bite. Most of my tertiary education (undergraduate through Ph.D.) was in two European countries.

A major difference is that European universities don't use GPAs. Two things matters most over there: your score on your final exams in fourth year, and, when applicable, the quality of your final-year project. The exams measure the knowledge you've acquired, and the project measures your ability to apply it.

A major consequence of this approach is that students don't stress out over grades for the entirety of their educations.

Many Americans argue that putting everything on one exam is too stressful, but IME/O, the stress is no greater than the stress American students face consistently the entire time they're in college. Looking back on it, it was far less stressful than the constant quizzes and exams here.

The European approach says, "We care about what you've learned by the end of the program." The American approach says, "Every mistake counts."

The European system is also more forgiving of failure. If you bomb say, your second-year exams, you repeat the year. The scores don't haunt you forever because again, all that truly counts is the exams at the end of fourth year. The fees are much lower there than they are here, so the financial consequences aren't so devastating. In addition, if you have a scholarship (generally because of low family income), you lose the scholarship during the repeated year and get it back again the next year, assuming you pass your exams (at least, that's how it worked where I was).

Some Americans may argue that this system encourages laziness and a poor work ethic, but it's well known that US college dropout rates are increasing and are ahead of most other OECD nations. For example, roughly 90% of UK students who enter university graduate. If the no-GPA system makes UK students lazy, why do so many get a degree?

You are supposed to go to the "best law school" that accepts you because that's how law world works.

Law world is massively overproducing lawyers with overpriced tuition.

Law school doesn't really have "fit", unless you are talking about similarly ranked schools.

See current employment stats for details.

Yes, and when two lawyers from the top school and top firm with corner offices meet, any ties are broken by whose book last year was worth more. Dance, puppets!

That's so 20th century.

I'm talking about the more relevant modern question:

"Will I be able to find any employment at all that will allow me to pay back my $200,000 debt within my lifetime?"

Plan of attack:

(a) Increase 529 contributions asap.
(b) support the "Hire Skill, Not School" campaign currently under way in SF Bay Area.

The "Skill Not School" campaign is currently focused on programmers. But Google purports to support it, and I'm planning to try and get a Google person to talk to our school district about it in a PTA forum directed at recent teen suicides in the area.

And I really want to keep DS from needing huge loans. I will expect him to work to help pay for college though! (That's just me based on my experience. YMMV.)

Sue

I doubt it's a panacea, but it does take away the college admissions drama.

Relevant article - if you are interested. I'm going to be stalking Laszlo Bock.. Wish me luck! http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/02/2...-get-a-job-at-google.html?_r=1&referrer=

I'm still holding out hope that the MOOC revolution is going to materialize.

So this is a solution less likely to be proposed in high-achieving school districts, but consider this: if you can find someone to do some hands-on training, and acquire appropriate textbooks, a motivated high VS kid can pretty easily acquire sufficient skills in a trade to pass certification tests, allowing him or her to take actual living or near-living wage jobs while in college. (Check out first-year apprentice electrician, plumber, or HVAC hourly wages, for example.) It's a handy skill to have anyway, should one ever become a homeowner. Plus, it's not on your typical elite college app...

Yes. Also along these lines, several posts on a recent thread discussed ideas for finding a good "fit", including alternative college experiences.