<p>I’ve recently read David and Goliath, a provocative new book by Malcolm Gladwell. There was a chapter titled Caroline Sacks. It’s a story about a girl from DC who went to an Ivy League college and then miserably failed to realize her childhood dream of becoming a scientist. The story tells a lot to us the parents and children who would want to attend uber-competitive boarding schools to help fulfill and maximize their potential. </p>
<p>Caroline was described as a highly intelligent high school student who had many stellar accomplishments under her belt when was ready to choose between Brown and University of Maryland. No offence to the latter, but of course she went ahead to attend the former (on a scholarship). There she struggled mightily in math and science courses while painfully watching her classmates who were from affluent public or private schools glide through one course after another. She eventually dropped out of chemistry major and regretted that she had chosen Brown: had she chosen the other, her dream might have come true.</p>
<p>While I found Mr. Gladwell’s analysis deeply flawed in statistics and heavily relied upon anecdotes like the above to appeal to human emotions (a topic for another day), the morale I have derived from the story was never put yourself among the bottom of a competing group. If you find yourself there, you might have already stretched too thin and not have enough oomph left to climb out of any trench you might bump into on your journey. You’ll be a lot happier too if you find yourself among front runners, or at least among front half. This is not necessarily limited to academics.</p>
<p>This is not the advice to avoid competitive environment, which I would argue you should always embrace. It’s just that, you should know your realistic self and find a group where you can compete and still have fun.</p>
<p>Disagree completely. I’d rather be in an environment where I’d need to stretch, even if I graduated last in my class. If you’re the smartest one in the room, you’re in the wrong room. If you’re the most talented one on the field, you don’t stand to learn anything from anyone.</p>
<p>Among the CCers, honoraryamom regrets having chosen elite univ vs full scholarship at a ‘lesser’ univ. I also witnessed plenty of classmates who would have fared much better elsewhere, myself included.</p>
<p>I hung on and I have no regrets.
My mantra had been
What doesn’t kill you make you stronger.
then, Am I dead yet? </p>
<p>I felt merely surviving not getting any stronger, but with plenty of grit and humility, not a hint of complacency.</p>
<p>Looking forward to book lady’s reaction - please do weigh in. We value your input.</p>
<p>I detect a reversal of the trend to “Play Up” in youth sports, and a return to flighting for league and tournament competition. Coincidental? </p>
<p>Although the USAFA experiment is credible, it and the other accounts are simply anecdotal rather than asymptotic. Thank you to the OP for initiating, and to payn4 & honorary for their honesty and vulnerability. I - and the 364 weekend voyeurs - thank you.</p>
<p>No, none deleted. I think Walnut is referring to the comments in another thread I linked above.</p>
<p>I sympathize with booklady’s view. I felt the same in my teens and going into my field that was the most difficult subject encountered till then, thus the reason for pursuit.
What did a 19 year old know? very little.
There are challenging worthwhile work or schools all around.
I found out that there are things that I can do fairly easily and sometimes so trivial that somewhat unappealing to me but important enough so that I don’t mind doing them, whereas others find them extremely hard. Focusing my efforts in those areas (my niche) led to the most success and reward. </p>
<p>Learning can occur anywhere. Confucius said ‘I’m sure to find a teacher in any three people, I choose what is good in them and follow it and what is not good and change it.’ (meaning somewhat lost in translation.)</p>
<p>I agree with you… well, mostly. If you’re No. 1 or the smartest person in the room or class, you may able to enjoy your status for a while, but it quickly wears out and becomes a dull experience. I understand that. I believe that that’s one of the main drivers for wanting to attend top BS for many students on this board. The desire to go to a place where you might not be No. 1 anymore or risk your chance of getting into top college so you can be surrounded in a more stimulating environment is a quality I admire and like to encourage. </p>
<p>The part that bugs me is “I’d rather be in an environment…, even if I graduated last in my class.” Why would you have to rush down to the bottom? Are there no other places between the two extremes? Have you heard of somewhere in between, like the middle, the vast middle that makes up 60-80% of student body? Many educational systems are designed to benefit the middle the most. That applies to most local public schools as well as Andover. </p>
<p>As Dr. Seuss said,“… when you’re in a Slump, you’re not in for much fun. Un-slumping yourself is not easily done.” You are more likely to cherish your slumping experience if you could eventually un-slump yourself. But why would anyone want to finish in a slump? If you’re not chasing after prestige, why not try to find a school where learning is still challenging, and enjoyable, yet you won’t have to un-slump yourself all the time?</p>
<p>In one of the Chances thread, a prospective student wonders what’d be his/her chance for Andover with 57 pctl SSAT.</p>
<p>One reply: “Keep in mind that the SSATs are only one part of your application.”</p>
<p>Another reply: “If your score is considerably lower, then u will need some other portion of your application to compensate.”</p>
<p>Both of the above responses state truth, yet I just find the latter more balanced and responsible advice.</p>
Not only will the student need that ‘hook’ to get admitted into the prep school, but as a probable lower academic performer in the prep school, he/she will need to lean on that ‘hook’ to get admitted into a selective college.</p>
<p>I said “even if”! I wasn’t suggesting that you would HAVE to graduate at the bottom of your class. I just meant that it would still be worth it to me even if that ended up being the consequence.</p>
<p>My point was that I’d rather be at the bottom of the pool of talent than be at the top of the pool of talent. For me, personally, I just feel that surrounding oneself with opportunities to stretch and grow is more important than standing out. </p>
<p>Being valedictorian of a school where you didn’t challenge yourself? Not for me.</p>
<p>I want to take this topic to a slightly different direction. Do you know anyone IRL who knows for sure they will end up in the bottom (by “bottom”, it can be bottom 25%, 50% or even 75%, whichever defines failure to them) of their class and still enroll in the schoool, or are clearly already in the bottom and still stick with it? Did you ask why? I personally dont’ know anyone in that situation, and I asked DC the other day who the kids at the very low end were at their school and he said he had no idea. Granted, this is a zero-sum game. Every school has a bottom half so one’s gain is at someone else’ expense, but I can understand why people are righteously “selfish” in this situation. Unlike public school, boarding school is a choice so why would those who are already in the bottom of their class still there? Why don’t they just leave? Can anyone share what they know - and anecdotes are fine.</p>
<p>You would really “just leave” a top-tier boarding school because you were in the bottom 25%? Unless you’re failing out, wouldn’t it make more sense to just focus on what you were learning than to focus on where you are ranked? I guess I’m missing the assumed connection between falling at the bottom of the rankings and being miserable or failing.</p>
<p>Forget about school for a minute, here’s another example: this fall my son left his town soccer team for an area club team. In town he was on the A team, and one of the better athletes in that group. But he wasn’t learning anything, and he was bored to death. It was all about kicking long balls and someone getting a breakaway and scoring. Snore.</p>
<p>At his club, he is below average, talent-wise. But the focus is on skill development. They’ve got his team playing in a division that is slightly above them (“playing up”). They’ve lost almost every game this season, but he’s developed more skills in the last three months than he has in the previous five years of playing soccer. Had he stayed in the small pond, he would’ve been a top goal scorer and “star” athlete. But isn’t that a fabricated type of success? </p>
<p>When he told us he wanted to apply to BS, we had a similar conversation. I asked him if he was ready to not be the top student in school anymore. Told him that if he went to Exeter or Andover, he could be average. Could be below average. And he didn’t hesitate for a second. “What if you get a B? Or a C?!” (Gasp) I asked. He said, “I don’t care. Think of how much more I’d be learning.” </p>
<p>That’s where I’m at. That’s the side I want my kid leaning toward, whether he’s approaching school or anything else.</p>
<p>Oh! Sorry, Benley. I meant to answer your question. I actually have a coworker whose brother graduated at the bottom of his class from Harvard years ago (not sure if dead last, but he struggled). </p>
<p>And I asked her this exact question. I asked her he had wished he had gone to someplace not as grueling. She said no way. He wouldn’t trade the experience for anything.</p>
<p>I better look at his iDevices to check if he has CC account (he better not!) and if his CC name is pwalsh… I’m going to hide your chargers again!</p>
<p>It really depends on the person how he/she will come out after 4 years of struggle.
My class of over hundred valedictorians (from their home towns) all felt struggling at the bottom barrel at one point or another. Since all except few were commiserating it, it wasn’t as bad. But it wasn’t a great experience either. </p>
<p>The thing is that there are plenty of schools (in the middle) to have oneself stretched without racing to the Top. </p>
<p>To pwalsh’s credit, I’ve heard that Harvard or Princeton undergraduates seemed considerably happier than MIT undergraduates (in STEM) but neither is a walk in the park.</p>
<p>One thing that I wish to have made it clear in this thread is the distinction between failing and being ranked last. I suppose one can be ranked last and still succeed. </p>
<p>Booklady, I wouldn’t know your son’s chance of getting admitted into Andover, but if he makes it, I doubt he will be anywhere near the bottom… based on what I’ve read in your other posts.</p>