Not me. Heck I would hope that even she doesn’t think that she is getting into “an elite school.” If so, her counselors have failed her. Absent a big hook, “barely” into top decile does not cut it for elite schools, not even close. (But that depends, I guess on your definition of “elite.” If its USNews top 20, then her app fees are wasted, since she is in auto-reject territory for most of them.)
@bluebayou said “And if I was an Adcom at an extremely selective college, that’s what I’d do, for perceived “fairness”, if for no other reason. Why would I take someone ranked “barely” in the top decile, over someone who is in the top ~1%, but had less sleep due to a more rigorous schedule?”
I would argue that some of the kids who are “barely” in the top 10% have a schedule that is just as rigorous as the top 1% kids. I posted earlier that my daughter is 1/100 kids at her school with straight A’s first semester freshman year. She took the most advanced academic core classes possible, had high 90s and over 100 in her classes, couldn’t get into honors Japanese because sophomores through seniors had priority, didn’t take a weighted elective such as band/orchestra because she wanted to take speech and debate and drama, self-studied Japanese and plans on taking Japanese II at the college level next year, is self-studying French to start in French III next year, plays the violin in our Young Artists Orchestra and could have easily placed in the Honors Orchestra and Band at school and easily gets 8 hours of sleep at night, hangs out with friends etc… Also, speech and debate was by far her most time consuming class her first semester. She spent hours after school working on her speech and 16 hour days at tournaments where she placed as a freshman three times.
Next year she plans on taking: English Lit Honors, Chemistry Honors, Precalculus Honors, French III Honors, AP World, DE Japanese II and Choir. Aside from choir, this is the most rigorous schedule available at her school. The only 3 AP classes available sophomore year are AP World, AP Geo and AP Psych. She absolutely could game the system and take AP Geo or Psych instead of choir and I still wouldn’t worry about her getting 8 hours of sleep a night, but why would she want to?
My daughter’s weighted rank is 91/740. She is not even in the top 10% and it has absolutely nothing to do with the “rigor” of her schedule. I was talking to a school counselor today about concurrent enrollment and she told me it is “possible” that my daughter will make it into the top 10%, but it is not a given. This is after one semester in HS and with the idea that she will take the most rigorous academic classes possible the next 3 years.
I am sure that my daughter is not the only one who has this issue. I am hoping that she squeaks into the top 10%, but if she doesn’t, then I guess we will have to rely on her guidance counselor to explain the situation when senior year rolls around.
@dfbdfb wrote “Ancient people generally, whether kings or not, didn’t have appreciably shorter lives than we do now—as long as they made it through childhood.”
One of my heroes is Eleanor of Aquitaine, and she lived to be 82 (b 1122 d1204 ad) She was amazing-definitely a Doe.
gfy dfb dfb. Problem is … does it in the family room. 
@“Cardinal Fang” -
This is not aimed at you, but the characterization on this thread of high achieving kids as score grubbing automatons is insulting. We know a bunch of kids that some people on this forum would characterize as “Zoes”, and they are great kids who work hard and have strong ambitions and goals in life, and find that studying hard, making good grades and challenging themselves academically makes them happy and satisfied. The disdain some posters have for these kids or their parents is very disappointing.
Colleges exist to provide an education. They should reward the strongest students with better track records over the weaker ones. As it is, schools are already considering a great number of non-academic attributes in admissions decisions. Additional non-academic requirements such as service only serve to dilute education mission of schools by promoting less academically qualified students.
LoudKYDad, I agree with your post 217.
There’s a limit to what we can expect colleges to police. There are plenty of students for whom a curriculum with a number of AP courses is, indeed, appropriate. If a parent is letting their child routinely get 4 hours of sleep, and sending the message that getting into the highest-ranked college is the be all and end all of life, that’s on them. High schools can and should do a better job trying to educate parents and students about healthy and unhealthy approaches to the college admissions process. Artificially lowering the bar for everyone isn’t the answer.
When I was a child, a well-intentioned librarian who thought my parents must be pushing me too hard told me that I shouldn’t move on to the books in the adult section of the library before I had read every book in the children’s section. That might have been good advice in certain cases, but in mine, I’m glad I didn’t listen.
The problem to me is not that Chloe is not getting into a super elite school, but that too many Choles feel like they must be Zoes to get into BC or Northeastern or other school that used to be very welcoming to a Chloe. Let’s face it, the top 10% at most high schools are not getting into Harvard or other super elites. It is perhaps a handful of students in that top 10% getting to a super elite (and talking here about leafy high achieving suburbs, not your average HS). So the others are scrambling for spots at the college one or two rungs down, that may accept 20-30% of their applicants, meaning around three-quarters of the applicants are rejected, many of whom are qualified. Thus, staying in the top 10% is important for a kid that wants the experience of what they perceive as an excellent college. And yes, PG, if they end up at a lower ranked college the world will not come to an end, but some kids (like yours) want to aim for the top 30 or 40 colleges, which now are not that easy to get into.
For me it is not just the kids that are throwing themselves in front of a train, or that contemplate it, that raise concern, it is the Zoes that are managing, but are so stressed out that their high school years are not joyful, but miserable. Not years of self discovery, figuring out who they want to be having some fun and maybe pushing the boundaries a bit, but are a non-stop slog of work. I never heard of kids “cutting” themselves when I was in HS. Yes there are kids that thrive on that level of effort, but I am not sure that requiring HS kids to be mini workaholics is healthy.
Many kids worked hard when I was in a leafy high achieving high school, they aimed high, and did ECs like sports or scouts, or being a candy stripper. Only a few students made it to HYPS, but the rest were easily accepted at other top colleges that have much more stringent admission standards in 2016. The pressure now is just much more amped up.
I’m wondering if what TheGFG is really referring to is the King having short and unhappy lives in his role as ruler because his being excessively pampered and sheltered left him ill-prepared for being a competent ruler which resuled in a short reign and possibly a violent life-ending ouster…whether in a form of a coup or a revolution.
@dftbdfb. My daughter either. All electronics stay in the dining room. This has always been my rule. My daughter doesn’t have a smartphone and doesn’t have the capability of sending or receiving texts after 10:30.
I think I mentioned this somewhere before, but we shut off the internet at the cable modem at 9:30 each night. Full Luddite :). Even for the grownups. The phones live downstairs. This started back in October (ish) and it’s been really working for us.
I also made both kids take all the social media off their phones over winter break after D15 pulled some crappy grades. Yeah, I know there are apps that let you hide apps. I told them if I ever caught them using one of those I’d take the phones away for good. Bad mom. After a week of freaking out over the lack of instagram, they rebounded and I’m seeing a lot more book reading.
I don’t distain the Zoes-my older one was a Zoe in the making by the end of 9th grade-4th out of 800 kids, straight A’s and completely burnt out and hating herself. We all took a big step back in 10th grade and she Flooey’ed that year. Now as a junior is on track to be a solid Chloe who is pretty happy with herself. So, I don’t distain the Zoes-I really worry about them.
I’m super happy for the Does (I wish we’d called them Bowies, too, RIP man), and I wish we had more Does in the world.
HSs that have such a large portion of straight A students usually either do not submit rank or make submitting rank optional. This relates to my earlier post about most admits to “elite colleges” not submitting rank, and as such rank generally not being critical for college admissions.
When I applied to colleges several years ago, I attended a basic, public HS that did not have as many advanced classes as most we discuss on here (~3 AP classes available, of which I took 2), so I took many classes at a nearby university that were beyond the level offered at my HS. I received A’s in the external college classes, but they did not contribute to HS rank. Furthermore, I did not receive straight A’s in less challenging/interesting HS classes, which further hurt my HS rank. So I ended up having an outstanding course rigor and perfect grades in college level classes, but below top 10% HS rank. I was accepted to Stanford, MIT, and ivies in spite of the HS rank; while higher ranked persons in the class were mostly rejected.
<nonsense. there="" are="" plenty="" of="" kids="" who="" organically="" choose="" something="" they="" enjoy,="" and="" it="" also="" makes="" them="" interesting="" to="" college="" admission="" officers,="" which="" is="" a="" nice="" bonus.="" maybe="" your="" kid="" isn’t="" stanford-worthy,="" though.="" that’s="" fine.="" my="" wouldn’t="" have="" been="" either="" (they="" weren’t="" interested="" in="" the="" first="" place).="" difference="" is,="" totality="" all="" posts="" abundantly="" clear="" that="" only="" worthwhile="" schools="" for="" daughter="" pretty="" much="" hypsm,="" oh="" berkeley.=""></nonsense.>
Why my kid is not Stanford-worthy? Because she prefers to spend her time with boyfriend, instead of saving the universe? 
Coomon. She is absolutely right, I did the same, and I ended up in Stanford. Why should not she?
All admission process is a … scam. 50% of spots reserved for “special cases”. Chelsea Clinton is not better than my D. If Chelsea was accepted, my D should have a chance as well. Chelsea had not done anything special, she just happened to be a daughter of POTUS. I am not POTUS, but I will do for my D as much as I can, I’ll give her a chance that she deserves. If is not her fault that she is not the daughter of a VIP.
Of course, my children would succeed. No doubt about it. I still believe that they may (and should) have a fair chance at HYPSM admission. She is not an athlete (my fault, she was born with congenital disease), I can’t donate 10 million to put her on a VIP list, I am not a high ranking politician, but I love my children, and I would help them with the recourses that I can provide (time and money).
In the meantime, my D’s job is to get perfect grades (she does) and score well on ACT/subject tests. All EC/community/saving the universe/legislative initiatives/Nobel prices/etc. - this is my job, IMHO. These are adult games, made for adult consumption, IMHO.
<but i="" think="" this="" report="" is="" going="" to="" make="" that="" worse="" not="" better="" @epiphany="" it="" will="" no="" longer="" be="" meaningful="" restack="" books="" at="" the="" library="" or="" volunteer="" concession="" stand="" basketball="" game.="" you’ll="" have="" do="" something="" “with=”" impact"="" for="" a="" sustained="" period="" because="" helping="" raising="" money="" your="" school="" as="" working="" soup="" kitchen.="" aos="" are="" judge="" relative="" merits="" of="" charity="" work.="" hope="" am="" wrong.="">
I agree. In fact, most charities need help with some low-profile, mundane tasks. For example, my children help to clean church and navigate traffic in the parking lot, every Sunday. Such activities (although very helpful) don’t have the “wow” factor. In fact, many charities don’t want to have volunteers to provide leadership, and make something “wow”. Too many leaders, not enough volunteers willing to mop floors.
<ironically, thinking="" of="" those="" parents="" who="" are="" running="" mom-and-pop="" drycleaners,="" live="" above="" the="" store,="" and="" push="" their="" kids="" to="" study="" for="" hours="" on="" end="" every="" evening="" weekend="" --="" might="" have="" a="" more="" compelling="" “in”="" if="" they="" put="" down="" cramming="" books="" actually="" worked="" in="" front="" lines="" drycleaner.=""></ironically,>
I think these kids DO work on the frontlines. Out of necessity. For example, when one of the parents is sick, or travelling. However, they don’t put it on resume, because it may cause too much legal problems. Underage working and safety regulations are very complex. Parents are afraid to admit that they are using their kids to run businesses.
<i agree;="" i="" think="" some="" judicious="" tempering="" is="" good="" for="" kids.="" the="" hard="" part="" figuring="" out="" what="" to="" protect="" them="" from="" and="" let="" suffer="" through.="" it’s="" painful="" as="" a="" parent="" most="" of="" us="" our="" first="" instinct="" ferociously="" against="" any="" all="" threats.="" such="" an="" anti-instinctual="" thing="" do,="" but="" oh="" so="" necessary.=""><i agree;="" i="" think="" some="" judicious="" tempering="" is="" good="" for="" kids.="" the="" hard="" part="" figuring="" out="" what="" to="" protect="" them="" from="" and="" let="" suffer="" through.="" it’s="" painful="" as="" a="" parent="" most="" of="" us="" our="" first="" instinct="" ferociously="" against="" any="" all="" threats.="" such="" an="" anti-instinctual="" thing="" do,="" but="" oh="" so="" necessary.="">
I am lucky, because my kids inherited my temperament. Stubborn and outspoken. If they really don’t like something, it is impossible to push them in this direction. Like trying to push a cat into a crate, when the cat knows that crate=vet=vaccination=shots and uses all four paws to protest I am not afraid to push my children, because they are very good in pushing back. Probably, too good. 
This might be due to regional and generational changes within the last 20 years…but such concerns weren’t on the radar of parents…even middle class multi-generationed American parents in my old NYC neighborhood back in the '80s and early-mid '90s.
Most kids in my old neighborhood started working retail/restaurant jobs like waiting tables, washing dishes, stocking shelves/working the cash register, etc from 10 onwards and it was widely accepted. If anything, the culture in my old neighborhood was such that barring scheduling conflicts or academic problems many would feel the family is spoiling/sheltering the child concerned too much if he/she wasn’t working a part-time/weekend job of this sort by 10 onwards.
However, I did get a glimpse of a completely different upper/upper-middle class world when I found middle school and HS classmates from upper/upper-middle class families from neighborhoods like the UES who never worked a day in their lives in K-8, 12, and back when I was an undergrad…even in college*.
- Wasn't necessary as the parent/family friend would often have a post-college job reserved and waiting for them upon graduation even if their undergrad cumulative GPA was in the low 2.x range.
I am intrigued by why there is so mich emphasis on the “top tier” in certain segments of the society that we are driving these kids crazy. I consider myself a Doe, with Flooey tendencies, who went to an ivy. I’m perfectly fine with who I am, but it wasn’t some transformative experience. No regrets, but my kids (1 Doe, 1 Chloe, 1 too young to know, but my guess is not an A student at all) won’t be attending my alma mater–just because of price. My spouse is much more hardworking than me, and that has served him very well. I am envious of the Zoe’s work ethic!
Back 20+ years ago! we thought that Yale wanted well-rounded kids and Harvard wanted angular kids. Guess I had thought that these kind of differences continued, so prepping for HYPSM etc has never made that much sense to me, if they are looking for different things.
“Why my kid is not Stanford-worthy? Because she prefers to spend her time with boyfriend, instead of saving the universe? Coomon. She is absolutely right, I did the same, and I ended up in Stanford. Why should not she?”
Why should she? It’s a school with a 5% acceptance rate. What makes her more deserving than any other applicant? What, the fact that YOUR world would crumble if she didn’t?
Again, you have this odd view that only a handful of schools matter. Why are you so resistant to opening your mind?
Gardenstatelegal, please note that I wrote “it depends on personality.” And of course there are a gazillion great schools out there and fit is important. I was just saying that if a school like an Ivy IS a fit, and the kid tends toward being somewhat immune to the usual pressures and anxieties, it is a shame not to consider one just because of the prejudices out there. My post was a response to motherofdragnons, specifically. You are preaching to the choir.
“I did the same, and I ended up in Stanford. Why should not she?”
And how many decades ago was that? 8-| Those days are long gone…
Look up Stanford’s admission rate from 20-30 years ago.
Prior to 1990 Stanford was, for the most part, a top regional U, that filled over 40% of their spots with smart kids from Calif.
Then a number of things all happened- Silicon Valley was created and exploded, new admissions directors were hired at Stanford with the mandate from the Pres and Board of Directors to nationalize Stanford’s outreach and appeal, the common app was created, making it far easier for students all over the country and world to apply to numerous colleges, the US became THE country where hundreds of thousands of newly rich International families wanted to send their kids to college, [especially the top colleges,] and Stanford became one of THE colleges to apply to, especially for students interested in engineering and computer science.
Add all those factors together and viola’- all of the reasons your DD wont be accepted at Stanford- there are simply too many applicants with the kind of accomplishments that Stanford seeks THESE days.