Posts by Susan James

hiddendriver34 said:It honestly catches me off guard whenever I look at my kid’s eighth-grade class list. It seems like almost everyone is signed up for after-school tutoring, and usually for multiple subjects at once. It's clear they're all gunning for those elite prep schools.

Now, go ahead and call me out if you want, but I really feel like kids who struggled and needed extra help throughout middle school aren't necessarily cut out for the high school honors tracks. In my opinion, those intensive academic programs are really designed for the students who breezed through their standard curriculum with top marks and zero struggle. If a kid had to grind through every single lesson just to maintain a decent grade in middle school, they’re going to hit a massive wall in a high-pressure prep school environment. They'll end up working five times harder than everyone else just to stay afloat, and honestly? That just leads to burnout and total misery.

We've been having this exact conversation for ages.
Don't worry, we aren't going to come after you; we'll probably just raise a glass to your honesty! 🙂🙂

From what I can gather about the tutoring scene these days—especially with how many teachers have left the profession and how much everything shifted online—people are basically just paying to fill in the gaps.
It’s not really "helping" kids master the material; it’s more like DIY homeschooling because the public school system isn't quite hitting the mark.

Anthony Ward6 said:Chemistry is traditionally the toughest because the head of admissions is from the Department of Medical Chemistry and Biochemistry. They seem to have this complex about their subject being the most specialized, so since they made it the hardest part of the entrance exam, they made sure it was just as brutal during freshman year too. I guess she just enjoys making things difficult for everyone.

People over at the College of Arts and Sciences were saying they might bring back language entrance exams because high school grads supposedly weren't prepared enough, leading to students enrolling without the right foundation for the coursework.

And it isn't just limited to the language programs at the College of Liberal Arts, either... you can really see the difference in student quality from year to year. Plus, relying on high school graduation scores alongside passing thresholds—which honestly make zero sense—doesn't provide enough weight compared to GPA, especially since kids come from such wildly different school districts. I don't think anyone can seriously argue that high school testing is an objective measure of readiness.
Not to mention, it burns through a massive amount of taxpayer money and wastes everyone's time.

I haven't seen any posts from capttawish yet! I'll be sure to let you know if they chime in. kaže:
Comparing the College of Science to medical school isn't really an apples-to-apples comparison when you talk about "how hard physics or chemistry is," but that’s beside the point. The real issue is just the sheer volume of applicants. At the medical school here in Washington, D.C., the competition is incredibly intense because you have so many top-tier students—people with amazing grades and deep subject knowledge—all vying for a spot. High school graduation scores just weren't enough to act as a sufficient filter for such a massive pool of high achievers, so they ended up implementing entrance exams to handle the selection process.

Larry Walker24 said:just because there wasn't supposedly enough organic chem on the SATs

I'm not entirely sure what exactly they’re testing on the chemistry entrance exam versus the high school exit exams, but I do know one thing: the stakes are high. For the entrance exam, you basically need at least a 55% pass rate in every single subject just to clear the initial hurdle. Meanwhile, looking back at the last few years of the senior finals, the pass rates for chemistry and physics have been sitting right around 25%. It definitely makes you realize how much pressure those students are under!
If I remember correctly, those high school graduation thresholds are actually determined by the overall pass rate of all students taking the exam—though I’ve heard some people apply for subjects they don't even need just to mess with the percentages! As for the actual passing grade required to get in, that's set directly by the university. That number stays fixed based on whatever specific needs the department has for its upcoming classes.

It would be awesome if you could compare the difficulty levels of the different subjects, Larry Walker24. I know people were saying chemistry was the toughest part that year, but some older students told me that physics actually ends up being the real killer on the entrance exams—especially for kids who didn't come from a specialized science track. Since they get about an hour less of it during high school, that gap really starts to show when the pressure is on.

Regarding enrollment at the College of Science, I think anyone celebrating their high school graduation results might want to temper their expectations a bit. To be honest, if you’re looking at the Physics department, they’re mostly just hoping people actually show interest in applying—especially for the teaching track. If the administration decides to implement strict entrance exams, we could end up losing the few students we currently have. That feels like a massive risk to me. 🤔

If there’s massive interest in a specific major—and we all know how high the demand is for med school—I honestly don't see why they wouldn't host their own dedicated entrance exams for selection. It would make sense, and frankly, it would be another way for the university to bring in some extra revenue through exam fees. 😬).

Michelle Nelson4 said:Personally, I think this whole situation is a perfect example of how certain universities allow all sorts of nonsense just to maintain an air of elitism. Anyone who remembers how things used to be can't help but wonder how many kids managed to get helpful hints or even outright answers from doctors and professors before their entrance exams—something that’s obviously impossible once you're dealing with the standard high school graduation requirements.

That said, there's definitely going to be a huge market for private tutors and specialized prep courses specifically for medical school applicants. The curriculum covered in a standard high school diploma just doesn't cut it for those aspiring medics, whereas for folks aiming for vet school, biology, or pharmacy, it usually suffices enough.☕

Are you suggesting that in generations where there were tons of open spots available, there weren't enough kids with doctor parents getting leaked questions?
Or maybe they got them but just didn't study hard enough? 🤔

Where did you get the idea that if there's an entrance exam for something, people immediately jump to tutoring and make a killing off it?
And even if they do make money, why does it matter? It’s actually in our interest to have better student selection (basically, making sure fewer students drop out once they realize how tough the coursework is) so people can finish their degrees in a reasonable timeframe.
They're being educated using our tax dollars, after all.

Even now with the medical school entrance exams, not every kid goes to a tutor. There’s a group of them who are just naturally great at math, stay perfectly on track with their studies, and even go above and beyond. Then there are the kids whose parents are well-educated enough to help them out at home.
Those students deserve their spots, especially if they had decent grades or didn't rely on extra points from sports competitions.

As for the high school exit exams, I’d sooner bet that during those tests, cheating or similar things might happen just to protect the reputation of an elite school from poor results (I'm not saying that *should* happen), rather than a professor leaking entrance exam questions. Because a professor who leaks a test will have to deal with that student for five years, knowing they took a spot away from someone else who might actually have more potential.

That’s really what we’re talking about all the time—comparing high school entrance exams to national standardized testing on other subjects.
It's much more likely that high school teachers might tip the scales for their own students (since it reflects on their own teaching performance), whereas professors haven't even met these students yet, but will have to teach them for four years. Whether that makes teaching easier or harder depends entirely on the foundation the students arrived with.

Anthony Ward6 said:Well, that only happened once in twenty years, and it was probably tied to COVID... but I guess the point is that for certain majors, your choice of high school really matters. A student couldn't realistically go from a vocational business school to med school because they wouldn't meet the prerequisites. I think vet med has similar requirements, too.

So, you really have to think about the long-term implications.

I’m not entirely sure how it played out, but it happened to the kids from the prep schools.
To me, it feels like a perfect example of why medical programs look at more than just your SAT scores.

If someone passes the entrance exams, why shouldn't they be able to enroll regardless of their high school background? You can dream big about the future, but life is unpredictable and things change along the way.

Sarah Hall53 said:Even back before the internet was even a thing—I didn't even have a TV in my room, mind you—I still couldn't catch a wink of sleep until well after midnight. And predictably, I’d be a total zombie by morning. Every single day.

Sure, we didn't have the internet, but we had landlines. I remember spending hours on the phone at night while my parents were asleep; honestly, I think it was actually cheaper back then, plus nobody would complain that they were hogging the line😬.
Some of us just preferred studying at night. For me, working the afternoon shift was the best because I could come home and dive straight into my books, get some decent sleep until noon, and then head to class. Even during my time at MIT, most of my exam prep happened under the moonlight.
And don't even get me started on reading late at night😍—I spent a huge chunk of my degree hunched over a desk lamp🥱

I honestly find it hard to wrap my head around parents who insist on single-session schools (like those kids who have to commute all the way across town starting in middle school just to avoid second sessions; it's wild)
.
I feel so bad for the kids stuck in those full-day schedules, unless they can manage to pick a start time around 9:00 AM (maybe with a little elective or something similar at 8:00)

Adam Diaz67 said:It’s not just some generational thing. Public transit is honestly getting worse every single year. The city keeps expanding in every direction, but besides those newer trams that actually hold fewer people and a few new buses, there hasn't been much real investment. Train service has been cut back. Buses have too. Even the trams depend on which line you're taking. I guess we haven't seen any real new lines opened since... well, maybe since the last administration? The last major extension was just connecting the neighborhood out to the suburbs. They’ve added more bus routes, but at the same time, the number of cars on the road has exploded, so those buses just get stuck in the same traffic. And don't even get me started on the constant construction and detours—you can't even find them on Google Maps half the time if you look.

A massive amount of people have moved in. So many people are flocking to the city for work or school, and the transit system just isn't keeping pace.
And it's actually getting even more crowded.
The main argument anyone uses when they buy a car is that public transit is unreliable. No matter how high gas prices climb, they’ll still choose to drive (I see plenty of people like that at my office).
There has been a slight increase in cyclists and scooter riders🙄 who tend to act more like kamikazes than actual commuters. I know quite a few high schoolers who bike to school, which I think is awesome (except when it's pouring rain or hitting extreme heat). Generally speaking, though, it's a great way to get to class.

Then, because the transit is so poor, everyone jumps in their cars, which clogs up the highways and makes everything even worse. We really need to rethink the tram layout—maybe shorten some lines or introduce more loops so that a delay in one direction doesn't cause a massive bottleneck in the other. Also, they really need to start cracking down on people driving in those dedicated bus lanes.

rowdypanther12 said:Are you serious?! Every time I took the train, I was always heading out to Long Village or Aurora, so I never even noticed any other 😂

Good grief, they really are just idiots

And get this—I'm actually shocked;
I didn't even start taking the train until high school, then I used it pretty regularly through college. At one point, I even picked a job that was just a quick 25-minute commute by rail (and in the opposite direction, too!).
Now, those trains are practically non-existent.
They've totally cut back on these routes (I guess everyone just drives now, and if students or high schoolers can't make it, they just stay in their dorms)||
The connection between downtown and the outer suburbs isn't what it used to be (maybe there's one in the morning and evening, but that's it). It used to run every hour, which really helped thin out the crowds because it would pick up people from the outskirts before hitting the main hub, preventing the slower lines from getting packed at the local stations.
To top it all off, they cut the service between the suburbs and downtown right when those areas have grown so much (not to mention the newer developments nearby). What a joke.

I might be slightly off base here...
but if they actually ran more trains to the school districts, you could probably get to a neighboring city faster than you can walk across town to visit your brother.

rowdypanther12 said:Hmm, that commuter train takes you all the way out toward Aurora, just past Long Village. 🤔
Plus, you can take that same line from the Sparrow area straight to Central Park, but it’s such a pain when you can't even get on at the Sparrow stop. Getting to the station from the suburban neighborhoods near the hills is also a bit of a struggle once you're off the train.

Actually, you can't take the same one; you’ll have to transfer somewhere.

Harmonica to Long Village between 6-8 AM has exactly 3 trains.
Harmonica to Grand Central Terminal between 6-8 AM has 4 trains.
Aurora to Grand Central Terminal (between 6-8 AM) has 8 trains (that’s what you’re calling the commuter rail).
Aurora to Central Park (between 6-8 AM) has 3 trains.
Central Park to Grand Central Terminal between 6-8 AM has 6 trains.

Terry Martinez10 said:Every university should be requiring a strong prerequisite knowledge base. Of course, it ultimately comes down to the individual and their own capabilities, but a university can—and should—set certain standards... much like the medical school example you mentioned.
If someone hasn't even mastered the high school level (whether through formal schooling or self-study), what hope do they have once they hit college?
Similarly, high schools ought to be a bit more selective with their students to ensure everything actually gets covered and mastered, rather than letting struggling students hold back the entire group.

And honestly, we saw an example of this with med school last year when there were still open spots during the fall semester because none of the applicants could pass the entrance exam. Personally, I think that's perfectly fine.

I mean, it’s definitely not ideal to have students coming out of top-tier prep schools who can't even pass the admissions test. The issue isn't that the test itself is too hard—since some people clearly passed it—but rather that some students didn't actually master their high school curriculum. And the kicker? The ones who didn't get in were supposed to be the honors students!

rowdypanther12 said:Taking the train east from Grand Central Terminal is a bit of a hassle since it doesn't really connect well with any MTA lines, unfortunately.

A friend was just telling me about taking the train from the suburban neighborhood to Central Park (though I'm honestly not sure why they call that stop Central Park).
It’s about a 20-minute walk from the station to the actual park. Honestly, the walking part isn't even the issue—it's that there aren't enough trains running that route. You usually have to transfer, and at that point, it's actually faster to just take the 4 or the 9 from Grand Central and get there in about 20 minutes anyway.
Plus, the trains heading toward the main hub are pretty infrequent, and the overall East-West service is even sparser than that.

Terry Martinez10 said:It’s hard for me to wrap my head around how that works in practice; if the whole point of high school is to prepare you for university, then shouldn't the curriculum be structured to ensure those topics are covered? If they're planned, then skipping them properly feels unfair. I mean, if they aren't teaching integrals correctly, how are students supposed to handle things like the Hess normal form and stuff like that?
E: I see that some programs are starting from scratch with the material, and honestly, I'm glad to hear that med school applicants have to meet certain prerequisite requirements from their high school days.

Medical schools require more than just a high school diploma—they have entrance exams too. They want students to arrive with a solid foundation so they can actually build on it, which makes total sense to me.
It’s surprising that other programs don't demand the same thing.
But if a topic is officially part of the curriculum and the professor is assigned specific hours and pay for that course, they really should teach it exactly as it's laid out in the syllabus.
I imagine it's pretty exhausting when you're trying to lecture to students who are just staring at you blankly because they lack the necessary background knowledge.

Preparation for college varies quite a bit. It isn't just about what was covered in high school; it depends on how much effort the student put in, their memory, their interests, and even just which teacher they happened to have. Think about it: a school might have something in its official curriculum, but if they run out of time, they might skip it entirely. You could end up with a specialist who taught themselves everything on the side and passed the entrance exam, while a traditional student walks away thinking they mastered a subject just because it was in the handbook, even though they never actually saw the professor teach it...

That's why having those entrance exams is such a good idea.

Adam Diaz67 said:Which college? 😁

Actually, I get them—I mean, the professors at college. The curriculum assumes you're coming in with some background knowledge since that stuff is covered in high school. Not just in prep schools, but in four-year technical high schools too. I think there were even entrance exam questions on it. For a technical degree, there was quite a bit of math involved. In total, about 300 hours (Math 1 135, Math 2 105, Math 3B 60).

@Susan James
That NYC-Zabok line is great. From the west side to Zabok, it's maybe a 45-50 minute commute if you're lucky and there isn't construction. Sometimes it takes longer. And the connection from NYC to Sisak isn't exactly amazing either; it's about an hour ride. So you have the option of taking the Metro or taking Amtrak (though you have to trek to Penn Station first). If, say, you're going from NYC to Sisak for a class that starts at 8, you catch the train at 6:30, otherwise you don't get there until 7:30. Both our transit options for quality transport that are always reliable and on time 🙄

Sorry for being off-topic, but I feel like some people really don't realize how big the City of New York is, or how bad the transit can be.

I know Chicago like the back of my hand, and I almost always rely on public transit to get around.
I wrote:

Susan James said:I was actually trying to say that traveling by train (which, unfortunately, doesn't run often enough) can sometimes be faster from certain spots than taking the Metro within New York City.
For example, if a kid wants to become a web designer:

You have options in:
Chicago-Zabok-Sisak
Zabok
Sisak
Depending on which neighborhood you live in, getting to Zabok (say, from Gajnice or Beverly Hills) is definitely quicker than heading over to Zitnjak, or wherever—like going from New Chicago to Sisak.
And as for the trips in the other direction? It’s usually pretty quiet in the morning with nobody breathing down your neck, so you can actually sit back, read a book, or even grab a quick nap.

To start with, I didn't actually say you had to make it all the way to Grand Central Terminal. I was just asking which neighborhood you're in and what’s closest to you. Honestly, you could probably take the Amtrak to reach the Getaldica area too, but trying to catch a train from the suburban neighborhood in that direction early in the morning is always such a gamble.
I know quite a few kids who commute from their suburban neighborhoods out to Aurora for school. There’s been some talk lately about using the schools there as an alternative for students who might not end up pursuing web design in Chicago—apparently, the facilities there are actually better equipped than what they have in the city.
I’m fully aware that there just aren't enough trains running lately, and they feel way too infrequent. It’s such a shame because we're seeing the number of routes actually decrease simply because people claim they aren't being used—which I think is a real missed opportunity. In my opinion, rail is still the fastest and most cost-effective way to get around.

A huge chunk of the MTA service is just frustrating because the buses—and even some of the light rail lines—constantly get stuck in the mix with car traffic. It’s especially bad when drivers drift into the dedicated lanes; they end up slowing everything down, which throws the whole schedule off. 🤷

urbantinker8 said:I suppose that’s true, though... it isn't exactly a common or realistic scenario where kids from New York City would enroll in a school out in Ivanic.
The opposite is obviously the case, of course, since the options in the city are so much more extensive.
But then again, you have those kids from Ivanic
a) who don't really make a fuss about the commute, I guess, because they realize that if they want to attend a school that doesn't exist in Ivanic, they just have to deal with it.
b) or they just find a dorm in NYC if the travel starts feeling like too much of a hassle.

I was actually trying to say that traveling by train (which, unfortunately, doesn't run often enough) can sometimes be faster from certain spots than taking the Metro within New York City.
For example, if a kid wants to become a web designer:

You have options in:
Chicago-Zabok-Sisak
Zabok
Sisak
Depending on which neighborhood you live in, getting to Zabok (say, from Gajnice or Beverly Hills) is definitely quicker than heading over to Zitnjak, or wherever—like going from New Chicago to Sisak.
And as for the trips in the other direction? It’s usually pretty quiet in the morning with nobody breathing down your neck, so you can actually sit back, read a book, or even grab a quick nap.

urbantinker8 said:But my point was really more about commuting within a single city all along, so that specific town of Ivanic doesn't really change the context much.
I once mentioned knowing a woman from the Upper East Side who felt her commute was way too far—even though she had her own car!—and she ended up quitting solely because of that distance. I know her well enough to know that was her only reason, and honestly, I told her straight up that it seemed a bit extreme to me.

But honestly, sometimes it’s actually faster to take a train to another city than it is to ride the Metro around New York City.

hiddendriver34 said:Look, if a kid has spent their entire life nursing sick kittens back to health and won't breathe without dreaming about becoming a vet, then by all means, let them go—even if it means moving to the other side of the country. But if they're eyeing some school that’s a three-day trek away when there's a perfectly good option right down the street that offers basically the same thing? I wouldn't even give it a second thought.

The only vet school option is over in Oakwood. And honestly, for folks living out in Preckog or Spain, that’s a solid ninety-minute drive one way under perfect conditions. If someone is truly driven, they'll make the trip.
But I can totally see why a parent might feel differently. If veterinary medicine isn't their top priority, and there's a great high school curriculum available halfway between them and the vet school—like somewhere in the 10th or 11th district, or even closer than Oakwood—they'd probably steer the kid toward the local option instead.

Anthony Ward6 said:I suppose location is the biggest priority for kids and parents who don't really care about the actual curriculum, though I doubt you'll often see a parent forcing a kid into a local cosmetology program just because it's close by instead of choosing a medical academy on the other side of town.

I feel like location only really comes into play when families are choosing between high schools. Maybe if a parent is pushing for an academic track but the kid is leaning toward vocational school, they’ll use the commute as a subtle way to nudge them toward the academic option. 😬It's all about convenience in those specific scenarios.

urbantinker8 said:The reality is that someone stuck on a long commute on a bus or train is probably just going to end up doing the exact same thing as a kid who isn't commuting, sitting on their own couch.
From what I've seen over the years, there really isn't any measurable difference in success or learning outcomes between kids who have a long daily commute and those who live right near the school.
Back in fifth grade, choosing where to live based on where I'd eventually work wasn't even a consideration. Jobs can change overnight, after all; I shouldn't exactly have to worry about living in the same neighborhood every single time or buying a new apartment just so I can sleep in a little longer, right?😕
It’s true—it's incredibly convenient if the school you want is just across the street, but if it’s on the other side of the city, you might just have to endure that commute for four years. Or maybe you won't. And if you don't, you might end up regretting it later because you couldn't pursue being a hairstylist since you ended up studying agriculture just because it happened to be the school you could see from your bedroom window.

You can absolutely get studying done on public transit. I see high schoolers and college students doing it almost every day. Those who are motivated, who really want to get ahead, and who know that putting in the study time now will pay off later—they'll definitely pop some headphones on and hit the books.
And you can do it whether the bus is packed or empty.
I actually finished about half of high school like that.
Now, though... well, you can't really pull off big presentations or all that other busywork while you're riding the bus.
(By the way, a thirty-minute ride is perfect for reading, but you can't exactly sing your heart out, unless you fancy talking to yourself or listening to an audiobook for class.

Regarding how everything connects, the system isn't terrible, but there’s definitely room for improvement (for example, adding more short-run or circular routes so delays don't mess up both directions).
Some parts of the city have pretty bad connectivity, so I completely understand why people try to choose schools and jobs close to home whenever possible. It feels a bit backwards to do the opposite, unless you're renting, in which case it's somewhat expected.

Sarah Hall53 said:I said ON AVERAGE.
which basically means there's always going to be those outliers—you know, people who just don't fit the mold—on both ends of the spectrum, so we could honestly spend all day arguing over anecdotal stories if we really wanted to.

Generally speaking, the notion that kids can't handle chemistry or physics without fully developed abstract reasoning is a flawed one. It’s also a terrible message to send to parents, suggesting they should delay school because children might find those subjects easier later on.
There isn't some magic line where abstract thinking suddenly switches on.
If you consider that—aside from brain development—it grows through experience (from sensory input to formal education), then by delaying school, you might actually be robbing them of the chance to develop that very reasoning. You aren't waiting for them to catch up; you're just stalling their growth.

Honestly, leaning on the word "average" is pretty weak. Abstract reasoning varies wildly from person to person; it’s shaped by genetics, early childhood development, life experience before starting school, and everything they learn once they're actually in the classroom. Some kids just hit those milestones faster, while others follow their own timeline.
Using "averages" as a reason to delay schooling is just a poor argument.

Not to mention the blow to a child's self-esteem. I remember seeing kids head into first grade feeling like absolute superstars because they were ahead of the curve—maybe even a bit more physically mature, too. Then, they start to struggle because, believe it or not, they aren't being given the stimulation or the foundational skills they need. They end up being perfectly "average," but they watch their peers—kids who couldn't even read a simple sentence at the start of the year—suddenly fly past them because their cognitive development was supported rather than delayed.

Look, there are valid reasons to delay enrollment.
Plenty of them.
But worrying about whether a kid can master chemistry in middle school isn't one of them.

Michelle Nelson4 said:The core issue here is that any kid in the American school system who starts struggling with reading comprehension or keeping up with lessons in those early grades should be immediately flagged for speech therapy evaluations through the school district. Instead, it feels like everything hinges on whether a parent is willing to accept that there might be an issue in the first place. On top of that, you often run into the hurdle of having to $200 pay out of pocket for private assessments because waiting for the official school evaluation can take forever...

You don't actually have to wait that long just for an evaluation, and the public school medical staff can issue a referral (and honestly, they should). There shouldn't be a need to pay out of pocket for private specialists.
Actual treatment is a whole different story 😢

If a school identifies a problem and recommends an evaluation, but the parent doesn't follow through, the school is required to notify the relevant NASA office.
Often, they don't bother because, besides the awkwardness of confronting the parents, it just means more paperwork for them—especially if the child eventually needs an adjusted curriculum.

It’s a similar situation with preschools; they’re supposed to detect issues, refer the parents, and notify NASA if the parents don't take action... they tend to be a bit more proactive, but unfortunately, the kids who most desperately need those extra screenings and treatments are often not even enrolled in preschool programs.
So they just head straight into elementary school without any prior support or treatment...