@THeGFG, aside from the split off at the 4-5 grade level (actually some of our elementary schools track the 5th graders from time to time, this seems to have come and gone over the years) the tracking on your school system looks nearly the same as ours. Our schools use a combination of test results and teacher recommendations to place kids in 6th grade pre-algebra which covers either grade 6 or grades 6-8 material. There is some flexibility during 6th grade with kids moving up or down. The material covered in grades 6-8 has a lot of redundancy. Look at middle school textbooks and you will see it’s a lot of the same stuff over and over again. That’s why it’s so easy to compress or skip over. The kids in the 6-8 start algebra in grade 7. The other kids will start it either in grade 8 or grade 9.
Unlike your school, ours takes a very inclusive approach. The result is that many of the kids placed into the top middle school track struggle with algebra, are not able to earn an A, and then move into geometry with a shaky foundation. This is setting bright students up for years of struggling with high school math, some of them not qualifying for the honors track in high school math. Despite this situation, I am told we still have parents trying to push kids who did not qualify into the highest middle school math track. I don’t know how many kids are there against school recommendations.
You obviously have a large population of well educated professionals in your district. I’m not surprised that so many of the kids are cognitively ready several years early to start the high school material but I am surprised that more than a few of them are able to get as far as calculus in elementary school. There is only so much that can be accomplished with extra effort.
And yes, I think you are correct that there are many students out there who would be ready to start algebra in 7th grade or earlier if they had appropriate educational opportunities. Supporting these kids is not something that the vast majority of schools do.
College admissions understand the challenges and dichotomies discussed in this thread. They can generally discern the difference between a student from a puppy mill, and one with genuine passion, curiosity and tenacity. Take a look at the admissions threads of any top tier school and there is always the “my kid had perfect everything and was denied, but an inferior kid was accepted”. Ironically, perfect test scores, 10 AP classes, and 1st chair orchestra is a very common and boring application. Stepping away from that hamster mill is likely to produce a more successful student, and college application.
I think the fear expressed by folks like theGFG is … What if elite colleges can’t discern the difference between the puppy mill and the “authentics” - and the authentics don’t get into Ivies as a result? Which presupposes that the Ivies are the only goal.
“I think the fear expressed by folks like theGFG is … What if elite colleges can’t discern the difference between the puppy mill and the “authentics” - and the authentics don’t get into Ivies as a result? Which presupposes that the Ivies are the only goal.”
@Pizzagirl - I fear it’s worse than that, in a way that is offensive to me and perhaps others: She recognizes that her kids aren’t “authentics” either, but feels like if any “inauthentics” are going to have a chance at that goal, she’d rather keep that privilege for people like herself.
Again, presupposing that elite/ivy admission is the be-all and end-all.
Thankfully, that was not the case. However, our elementary school has a number of kids that are two or three levels above grade for math. Maybe they were naturally good at math, maybe they came from a family of math professors, or maybe their parents owned the local Kumon franchise. I don’t know why, but these kids were head and shoulders above their classmates.
The solution in our district was to put them all on a bus to the middle school so they could take classes with all of the other very advanced math students in the elementary school district. When these kids got to middle school, the solution was to put them on a bus to the high school so they could take higher level math classes there.
The point being that schools should not cap the academic growth of any student no matter how they got there. There are solutions to these types of problems, and, if you are going to have problems in high school, strong academic achievement and high parental involvement in education is a good problem to have.
The solutions to these types of problems require creative thought. Unfortunately, most educational bureaucrats or boards have little creativity, and the solution that WPP choose seems to be among worst possible in terms of limiting the academic growth of their best students. We should be embracing academic competition, not shutting it down.
On thing that bothers me about this discussion is that it seems to be largely from the White perspective. Historically when certain minority groups were behind white students, in aggregate, the perspective seemed to be that those groups did not work hard enough academically. Now that another group is clobbering the White students academically, the perspective seems to be that working that hard is harmful.
How did it get decided that it is the White student group that works exactly the right amount?
That presupposes that an “authentic” kid will make a better student than a “puppy mill” kid (that terminology is so insulting). Other than sorting potential students by regional, gender, racial and economic statuses, it is not clear that all of the essay reading, hemming and hawing they do makes any difference to the long term success of the student, class or school. It seems to me that other than the hard numbers like yield rates and GPA/test scores, the adcoms at elite colleges set their own goals, and then they self-judge as to how successful they are in meeting those goals for each class.
For all we know, picking students who meet a minimum threshold randomly might very well produce a better class than one hand selected by the finest Ivy educated adcoms. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Are we reading the same thread? I had been thinking all along that those expressing concern with hyper acceleration is that it is dangerous to the mental health of the kids caught in the system, all of them. Yes, I know, the solution that’s been offered by some is opt out if your kid isn’t up to it or you don’t subscribe to the philosophy. It simply isn’t that black and white an issue. As many of us have said and said again it isn’t so easy to opt out of a prevailing dynamic, even when you guide your kids away from the craziness. They are immersed in it, it is toxic, and it affects them all. That includes the ones who are not interested in Ivy admissions and who are not consumed by college admissions. I can think immediately of some wonderful teens who believe themselves to be inadequate because they are not able to “keep up.” Whatever that means.
And FYI in the school district that’s one of the craziest out here, the goal is a UC not an Ivy. But it goes so far beyond college admissions. Frankly, it goes beyond academics. There’s a crazy pressure to look perfect and effortless in all ways. We know people (yes, more than one) who have lost children to suicide. We know people who have children who cut themselves, who struggle with anxiety, who have developed eating disorders. My guess is that those of you who think you are immune or who think your kids are better/stronger/smarter than those who are affected simply don’t live in a school district where the arms race has gotten out of control. Believe it or not. The effects are pervasive. I don’t have the answers but I want to be clear that there is absolutely no thinking at all that I want my “inauthentic” kid to be competitive against the “puppy mill” kids. If anything, I want her NOT to be competitive with those kids! I’m pulling in the opposite direction.
And those of you who think this is an Asian/Caucasian divide, think again. The people most vehemently opposed to it in my area are second and third generation Asian American families. For that matter, I’ve been warned that “people are crazy here” by friends who immigrated and have their kids in the crazy school. One first generation friend told me she chose the place she lives currently because she wanted to escape the “ghetto.”
I still struggle with blaming the system. I continue to think that the crazy parents are the primary problem. What are parents teaching their kids? Why not focus on effort over grades? Why not focus on major over school name? Why not support your kids and help them when they need it? Why not encourage them that friends, and sports and values matter too. Many parents can do a much better job than they do. They are watching you. Teach them well.
What if they only have an ACT of 23? What if they end up at a Michigan State or even a community college? They can make an amazing life from there.
@3girls3cats - sort of, but here’s how the conversation invariably goes:
“Kids are so stressed!”
“You can help your kids not be stressed if they, and you, make different choices.”
“But then they will lose! And that won’t be fair! Because [insert argument, often racist].”
Meanwhile, usually ignored in the discussions are:
“My kids are not stressed because they’re able to do what they set out to do”
“My kids are not stressed because they have their own race to run”
“The prize of an elite college is overrated”
“Most US schools have the opposite problem i.e. under-achievement”
^^^ This! Thanks 3cats. I just couldn’t write it again. It is NOT about keeping one group down over another, it is about setting up a school culture with such high stress that permeates to all levels of students. This is being noted by the educators, not just parents. There are plenty of kids that opt out and do their own thing. But for some, regardless of parents telling them it is fine to not run the race, they are all in and all stressed out. Trying to find a way to reduce that level of stress, while providing a good education, should be a universal goal. Not sure it is achievable, but I don’t get why the assumption is that anyone who questions the level of stress has a kid that can’t compete or is trying to keep high achievers down.
As to moving, it is not always easy financially or for commuting. Plus, finding a district that is good, but not stressful, is not that easy.
If you are referring to Palo Alto Unified School District, it is likely that the popular goal is not a UC, but the super-selective university that is within its attendance area.
At our current school the average ACT is 27 and top students of all ethnicities are definitely running the rat race to varying degrees.
However, in the high school where I grew up, the average ACT continues to be about 19.
Ratcheting down the stress levels just a bit in the rat race schools, and increasing the stress levels a bit in the majority of schools where the average is still about a 20 ACT, would probably make us all be better off.
D1 really thrived with the hypercompetitive academics. If she was a football player with the comparable level of athletic talent, nobody would be discouraging her from working too hard, but in our current society, exceptional academic prowess is viewed in terms of pressure on the other kids to compete. Academics WERE the thing that for her defined her self-worth and supplied her with self-confidence. It would have been criminal to deny her opportunities to achieve just because some other kids were stressed. Nobody had any sympathy for her when she was cut from an athletic team without any explanation or accountability. She (we) had to deal and it was very traumatic.
D2 lived with D1. She was stressed. She had much more balanced interests, and was much more athletic. The self-imposed academic pressure was brutal on her. In the end, and with our encouragement, she shunned all of the colleges that might have attracted people like her sister and EDed to a top 50 school that she loves and where she is getting a terrific education. She said that she always felt like a slacker in HS but in college, she feels like a really good student and it further motivates her. Nonetheless, she found herself much better prepared for college than her peers and she attributes a lot of that to the high-pressure HS that she attended. Was it worth it for her? No way to know, but she leans yes. I’m not so sure.
I don’t think there is an easy answer here, but denying kids opportunities is definitely not the answer.
@3girls3cats “In our school district the mean ACT is between 30 and 31 depending on the cohort. Nearly 60 kids were NMSFs last year and it’s not unusual.”
It seems to me that at that level of achievement, all of the kids should see themselves as winners. They have all learned a huge amount, will have the opportunity to attend a top 100 school, and have a great life and career.