Will Acceleration Increase Chance of Ivy Admisson?

Parents Forum
121

<p>Actually, I don’t think the OP was meant mischievously. I think it was a satire. For people to think something can’t be meant seriously is itself a substantive response, when you think of it.</p>

<p>I have seen oodles of “should I accelerate” posts in homeschooling and gifted/talents lists before. None have dwelt on Ivy admissions or wondering about how this impacts grades. All have mentioned where the child currently is academically, whether supplementation is possible in the current class, what would be available educationally if the child were accelerated, whether the child is bored in school or has a particular interest s/he wants to pursue, where the child is physically and psychologically, etc. People want to know about loss of friendships in the existing class, inability to make new friendships/bullying/etc. with older classmates, hitting a wall at an older age that would have made having an extra year beneficial, as well as how all this interacts with any the perceived benefits of acceleration. They want to know experiences in comparable situations faced in the past – was acceleration beneficial or not?</p>

<p>Seeing nothing of that in the original post makes it a little hard for me to (1) take seriously or (2) address substantively. What we know about the reported 7 year old is either vague (good at math) or lacks credibility (likes the courses available at Harvard, MIT, and Princeton).</p>

<p>I spoke up rather than remaining silent for three reasons. One, new posters may not realize that people do make stuff up on CC. (Maybe it is a tiny fraction of 1 percent of all posts, but it happens.) Two, I wouldn’t want people to draw from this thread the conclusion that parents exist who are, to use Curmudgeon’s wonderful phrase, so “bug eating nuts.” Three, the reference to homeschooling really got my dander up, because of a negative stereotype we homeschoolers face of being control freaks who try to program or groom super-children, a phenomenon I’ve never run across but would be presumably presented in the post.</p>

<p>If someone comes up with a set of relevant information, I would be glad to offer my assessment. I’ve even been known to eat my words (mmm, mmm, good – another witticism I stole from someone else) when further information is given that proves me wrong.</p>

122

<p>Diane, none of the reasons you stated above justifiy your public accusation of ■■■■■. This board doesn’t need self appointed ■■■■■ police to protect us. Please let us make our own decisions/choices in the future. I also think we should dispense with the use of the word ■■■■■. Many of the newcomers who have been accused of being ■■■■■■ who are not ■■■■■■ don’t even now what the word means and have no idea what they have been accused of. So, if you still feel the need to discredit posters in the future, do it with an explanation rather than a label. Thanks.</p>

123

<p>When I was young, my mother taught me, “Do not take offense when no offense was intended.” (The first time was when I was offended because someone wished me, a Jew, a “Merry Christmas.” I no longer take offense at that, even from people who know I’m Jewish.) </p>

<p>I responded substantively because, in a similar vein, I do not assume duplicity. I would rather remain polite and respond, and prove myself a dupe, than take the risk that I am insulting, intentionally, a real person asking a real question, no matter how absurd I think the question may be. </p>

<p>If I truly suspect a false post, then silence is my preferred response.</p>

124

<p>Well, DianeR, I for one appreciated the tone and content of your post, although poster #122 clearly did not. Thank you.</p>

125

<p>DianeR – I agree with you and think you were right to bring it up. Actually, I hadn’t posted before because I make it a point never to post when a new thread with a provocative subject is created by a new poster… at least not until I have seen the OP come back to respond – which obviously hasn’t happened here. I did find it amusing to watch the responses… but then, more than once I have seen heated debates in threads that began with a quoted article from The Onion. </p>

<p>I can certainly see why someone would find the exercise of creating a phony name and starting a threat with an outlandish post would find the ensuing debate quite humorous.</p>

126

<p>acinva:</p>

<p>As far as I can tell, you have not addressed the OP but have confined your contribution to policing other posters while telling them that CC does not need a ■■■■■ police.</p>

<p>Would you care to offer concrete suggestions to the OP?</p>

127

<p>Marite, I do not have any advice for the OP. Just because I feel that making ■■■■■ accusations is inappropriate doesn’t mean I have helpful contributions to every post on this board.</p>

<p>I totally agree with Chedva – “I would rather remain polite and respond, and prove myself a dupe, than take the risk that I am insulting, intentionally, a real person asking a real question, no matter how absurd I think the question may be.”</p>

<p>Some of you simply want to show others how clever and insightful you are by making ■■■■■ accusations. I’ve seen it time again. Why don’t you go back and look at some prior accusations that turned out to be false. I don’t like to see anybody ganged up on by the seasoned posters. No wonder some people never come back. </p>

<p>I’m done with this argument. I just hope you let the adults decide for themselves who is real and who isn’t. Move on if you don’t like a post because whether you realize it or not, your ■■■■■ accusations are getting a rise out of the ■■■■■.</p>

128

<p>Acinva:</p>

<p>May I quote you?

</p>

<p>That should apply to threads as well. Let’s leave the policing to the moderators, shall we?</p>

129

<p>Chedva and acinva, your lessons in politeness just warm my heart. Virginia truly is for lovers, isn’t it? Thanks for giving us miscreants a lesson in forum decorum. I know how difficult it must be for you to criticize fellow posters when you believe they are acting inappropriately. </p>

<p>Well, I for one will stand on the deck of our aircraft carrier and salute you - “Job well done”.</p>

130

<p>Acinva,</p>

<p>Earlier you wrote: “Don’t respond to what you don’t like and I’ll do the same.”</p>

<p>Perhaps you might apply that to my posts. Meanwhile, I will decide for myself to what and how I wish to respond. </p>

<p>If the moderators wanted to promulgate a rule that every post must be assumed to be 100% true or the word “■■■■■” could not be used, I would adhere to it. Either that or find another forum with more of a commitment to free speech. They have not done so.</p>

<p>(BTW I’m still waiting for someone to show me that it violates the posting rules to bring up spelling, etc. errors in a post, which I did and was subsequently criticized for by someone else.)</p>

<p>You also wrote, “…if you still feel the need to discredit posters in the future, do it with an explanation rather than a label.”</p>

<p>If you look at what I wrote, I did this. It was only after a number of others started using the term that I used it as well.</p>

<p>If people don’t know what a ■■■■■ is, they can google the term. It is a well-known one. If someone is going to participate in an internet forum, it is useful to know the lingo.</p>

<p>Saying my points aren’t persuasive isn’t a very persuasive argument, or an argument at all really. It is only stating a conclusion. Some say there is no reason to disbelieve, so I listed some reasons. Then I’m castigated for listing my reasons.</p>

<p>I’m not telling people that they can’t argue or disagree with me. But I’m being told it is impermissible to argue or disagree with them, or at least publicly acknowledge that I do. Who’s trying to police whom?</p>

<p>I don’t see how we need to “let” people decide for themselves. Of course, they will do so whatever any of us say. It seems to me, though, that they will make better decisions if they can see the arguments from both sides first.</p>

131

<p>Quite early on, after reading the OP and replies, I decided that I didn’t particularly care whether the OP is a satire, spoof, phish, or the genuine article and why? Because of the wide gamut of entertaining and informative replies the OP elicited - and rightly so, I do believe, because this thread taps into a fascinating trend and mindset that hits a nerve. It is not at all unusual and nothing new, especially in the tri-state metro NY area for parents to sit around and ardently discuss their first grader’s future college plans. I know my friends and I suffered through it “x” number of years ago (and many of us wound up in the so-called “drop-out” generation, so so much for advanced planning and pushing…) It is tempting to say that “the more things change, the more things stay the same” but times have changed and the push to get our kids into the “right” school and plan a strategy to achieve that end is not the same - it is more intense and on a wider scale, no doubt this is an issue that does sparks ardent discussions in quite a few homes. If anyone is in doubt, just watch the MSN video clip of the interview with Sally Rubenstone and Michelle Hernandez (posted on the CC featured discussion thread). Michelle Hernandez mentions that NY parents of 3rd graders continually try to hire her college admission services! So, from this angle, this is “the kindergarten admission frenzy” that later turns into and fuels the “the college admission frenzy” - and the choice isn’t always to push ahead, but also to hold back.</p>

<p>"Fueled by the increasingly rigorous nature of kindergarten and a generation of parents intent on giving their children every edge, the practice is flourishing in New York City private schools and suburban public schools. A crop of 5-year-olds in nursery school and kindergartners pushing 7 are among the most striking results.</p>

<p>“These summer boys have now evolved to including girls and going back as far as March,” said Dana Haddad, admissions director at the Claremont Preparatory School, in Lower Manhattan, referring to children who turned 5 in those months but stayed in nursery school. “It’s become a huge epidemic.” In some corners, the decision of when to enroll a child in kindergarten has mushroomed from a non-issue into an agonizing choice, as anxiety-generating as, well, the private school kindergarten admissions process itself. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/nyregion/19kindergarten.html?hp&ex=1161316800&en=eb7fa091ed5a83f2&ei=5094&partner=homepage[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/nyregion/19kindergarten.html?hp&ex=1161316800&en=eb7fa091ed5a83f2&ei=5094&partner=homepage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

132

<p>In another thread, I posted, that in my community, it is usually lower income families who enroll their children in public schools’ kindergarten classes earlier while more affluent families hold back their children as they can better afford the cost of daycare. I also looked up the cost of full-time care at our old daycare center: $21k for infants and nearly $15k for preschoolers. While it continues to be the most expensive daycare center in our community, I would estimate that other daycare options probably cost over half of that amount. It is a considerable expenditure for families with limited resources. The holding back trend is definitely linked to family income. I don’t remember, however, parents making the decision to hold back their children with college in mind.</p>

133

<p>DianeR -</p>

<p>My whole point had nothing to do with the “rules”. It had to do with common decency, courtesy, giving people the benefit of the doubt and not assuming the worst about people until you have proof that you should.</p>

134

<p>marite, I agree that poorer families will tend to enroll kids in K for financial reasons. In a neighboring town that has tremendous range of incomes, the most contentious school budget topic is always whether or not to continue free preschool for 3 & 4 year olds. My own town only offers 1/2 day K, with a very cheap aftercare component, and parents are always pushing for K to be made a full day program.</p>

<p>But I know some families who have held boys back to gain college & sports advantages. Wealthy parents sometimes send their H.S. graduate sons to a year of boarding school so Jr. can grown a few inches. (One of the legal analysts on a network news program, last name Ford, did that for his son. Irish boys tend to hit their growth spurts later than average.) I found this practice ridiculous, and we chose to move our late August son along with his classmates. Much agonizing over the decision, believe me, because he was definitely behind in maturity and fine motor skills. Our d had been bored to death with the grammar school curriculum, so we couldn’t imagine having him face that while being even older. Plus, I had read about the “big, bored bully” problem that the boys who had been held back were facing as they finished their h.s. years. We agreeed that whatever decision we made, we’d accept its consequences and not drive ourselves crazy with 20/20 hindsight.</p>

<p>But how can you not? He’s 10 now, and only one 5th grader in his school is younger than he. Took him a while to navigate the social/pecking order, as we pulled him from a Catholic school after 2nd grade & have dealt with ADD and slower fine motor mastery. Still don’t know if it was the right decision to buck the tide and move a late summer boy along.</p>

135

<p>Stickershock:</p>

<p>In most cases, it is the families who have the financial wherewithal to do so who agonize over whether to hold back or not: I am not saying that holding back or accelerating is right or wrong–just stating the context in which these decisions are made.<br>
We chose to enrol our kids in a school that had combined grades so that in any given year, the kids were one grade lower or above the rest of the classmates, regardless of age.
Up until middle school, however, in social studies/humanities, grade did not matter; the curriculum was the same (kids hitting a unit at different grades depending on when they joined the class) but kids were expected to work to their particular standard 4th graders might be held to higher standards than 3rd graders as a general rule, but essentially, this was an individual matter, dependent on each child’s abilities.

I think the disadvantages wane over the years as a difference of a few months becomes less of an issue in development. Even physically, kids develop at different rates. S has two friends who are now the same height (tall). But one shot up in 8th grade and the other did not shoot up until 11th grade.</p>

136

<p>My two daughters were born 2 years and two weeks apart. Their fall birthdays are both after the cut-off for the school year for our district. The older one was very precocious. Her Montessori pre-school went to first grade and we were able to accelerate her to enroll in public elementary second grade. For the younger one, we kept her at grade level. I believe it was the right decision for each child.</p>

<p>I still believe the OP is a ■■■■■, but it did make for an interesting and fun discussion.</p>

137

<p>I’m perfectly willing to let the record speak for itself at this point. Read what has been said and make up your own minds about everything – credibility, who is assuming what, decency, what have you.</p>

<p>I’ve said the last I care to say on the subject.</p>

138

<p>I think many parents are hoping their kid can gain confidence by being a bit bigger, older, on track, etc. & hold him back for those reasons. That confidence can carry over long past the time when the younger boys catch up. My son has plenty of boys who are more than a year older in his grade. He’s probably the shortest boy in the grade & HATEs that! Family height & growth patterns point to a very tall adulthood, but if he’s like my brothers, the growing will happen in college. We’ll have to live with him not making the varsity basketball team, I guess.</p>

139

<p>Where I live, many parents of boys hold them back for a year. In part because it gives them another year to ‘mature’. But also, in part because of increasing the odds they will be large for their class – and we all know the importance of being ‘big’ to boys of all ages ;)</p>

140

<p>As the song goes, “Short people got no reason to live.”</p>