<p>The school systems seems to be bi-modal, with some “excellent” schools and/or districts and the remaining ones ranging from mediocre to abysmal. Similarly, there is a similar discrepancy within some schools such that there is an AP/Honors track which provides a challenging curriculum and there is a “dumbed-down” track for the rest of the students. This last sentence describes the school my 2012 daughter attends. So, students who are ready for appropriately challenging high-school courses can only get them if they take APs in this, and similar, schools. I also see a small cadre of students on overload with APs and extra- curricular activities, amidst a sea of largely disengaged, disenfranchised youth. Students who are not taking honors classes may have straight As, but be relatively unprepared, as the friend of one of my kids’ who thought she was doing well with a high-A average, but has bombed the SATs with a 1300 ish score out of 2400. Other districts/schools have more high-pressure environments due to a high-achievement mentality overall, representing the socioeconomics/demographics of their area. I live in CA; I realize there are states that do provide more of a consistent, high standard across the board. </p>
<p>I wonder what it would take for us to provide appropriately challenging coursework for students, throughout the country? How do we raise the standard of achievement on average, or for typical students? How do we help students be engaged in their learning, rather than have them rush around from one activity to another in the hopes of grabbing the gold ring of acceptance to an elite college?</p>
<p>Only so many students will gain entry to elite institutions, private or state flagship. What about the rest of the students, who may enter college woefully unprepared? Or, there may be quite capable students who feel they are failures because they are not outstanding-- the B+ kids in the honors/AP track… OR the kids who soldier on --contributing in supportive roles-- but not in leadership positions. Aren’t most of us in those types of supporting roles at least some of the time, if not much of the time, in our lives? So why do we focus so much only on leadership?</p>
<p>So, what am I saying? I guess that while there is a group of very overwhelmed, stressed-out kids overstretched in their academics and outside activities, there may be another, larger group, of students who do not even begin to consider planning for life outside of high school until 2nd semester, senior year. Hey, with 2 counselors for 3000 students, they do not get the guidance to plan for their future early enough. As a society, we need to do better for both groups.</p>
<p>My older kid (college student/“elite” university) recounts that the college admin instructed students to steer visitors for admit weekend away from topics such as SAT scores/AP tests/GPAs/extracurriculars that “look good” and toward interests in genuine learning, so if someone began to talk about the impending AP chem test, steer them to talk to a student involved in interesting research in Chem, or doing an honors project in that area, or involved in a fascinating science-related extracurricular endeavor, etc. First year students were given the suggestion to take classes that interest them for the first year, and to worry less about their career direction in that immediate year, but more about engaging in the learning process. These kids, by and large, will do fine – but we could do a better job of getting them to where they need to be, academically prepared and with less stress.</p>
<p>Now, the rest of the kids, who are the majority, what are we doing for them?</p>