Posts by Susan James

Michelle Nelson4 said:In NYC, there were really only two public high schools that had an entry cutoff below 74 last year—the Ninth and the Twelfth (honestly, I can't even remember where they're located!)
plus those specialized dual-language programs in French and German, though you have to pass a language proficiency exam to get into those. Every other school had a cutoff higher than 74 points.

The 9th is over in Brooklyn and the 12th is out in Queens.

That classic school everyone seems to be talking about lately also had a cutoff under 74.
Both the freshman and junior tracks.
Actually, I heard the junior track was accepting students with scores as low as 60, or maybe that’s just a typo in the records? 🤔

hiddendriver34 said:The number of applicants really comes down to the minimum score threshold set by the school itself. It’s pretty straightforward: the lower they set that cutoff, the more students are going to jump at the chance to apply.

So, what’s the cutoff looking like for the 7th or 2nd year?
Is it under 75?
In my experience, when schools make their decisions, they don't just look at that baseline threshold. They usually weigh things like last year's final admitted student scores, SAT results, how close you live to campus, and stuff like that.

I have a feeling that students who didn't pick the advanced math track this year might actually do pretty well in the STEM programs if they have the drive and the talent. They might edge out those who did, and then everyone else will likely flow into the general studies tracks.
On the flip side, if someone isn't interested in heavy math or wants to focus more on languages—and maybe missed out on some extra credit points—they might find themselves having to stick to the advanced track just to stay competitive for the general programs, assuming they don't implement entrance exams.

Well, that’s what I wrote—the entrance exams have a three-day window 🤷

I know some kids end up taking two tests on the same day, but honestly, it doesn't seem impossible to me. These are top-tier students who are incredibly driven to get into a prestigious prep school... they can handle two tests in one day or five in a week if they have to.
The stress is mostly for the parents.

As for those testing tomorrow, they've already had plenty of practice with these types of problems. 🤣

Looking at the scores, there aren't many hitting above an 8. If you're looking for a perfect 10, you'll basically be hunting for a needle in a haystack. 🤷
But seeing so many scoring in the 5 to 7 range actually looks pretty good to me. It should help balance out a B in a less critical subject or maybe make up for extra credit earned through swimming or table tennis competitions.
Actually, just like they mentioned, if two students end up with the exact same score, the tiebreaker goes to whoever performed better on the entrance exam itself. 🤔

Michelle Nelson4 said:Personally, I don't think this data tells us much. A lot of students just select "General Studies" as a fallback option—it covers them whether they end up in a language academy or a specialized prep school. Plus, there's always a huge group of kids who genuinely want the general track, which naturally inflates those numbers.
As for the specialized prep schools, having these entrance exams might have discouraged some interested applicants. But honestly, looking back, the old way was even more chaotic. Having schedules scattered all over town on different days meant kids were constantly racing against the clock. If you didn't have a parent who could take a day off work to drive them from one side of the city to the other, you were basically stuck. This is exactly why I argued that we should move toward a "one exam per school" model rather than this universal testing system that feels like a mini-SAT marathon.

What running around for days? 😕
I think you're exaggerating a bit.
Yesterday, the tests were at the 15th Street location.
Today is the 10th Street spot.
Tomorrow is the 1st and 5th.
If someone really, really wants to try every single math assessment available, sure, then fine—but that's only three days.
It's the same deal with them testing for printing, English programs, and pretty much everything else...

And it sucks that they're dealing with this heatwave, though I assume most of these schools have AC.🙂

mellowskipper said:https://www.nytimes.com/section/education
Interesting.
It seems kids aren't exactly rushing to get to their entrance exams...

I wouldn't go so far as to say students in Washington, D.C. are avoiding the specialized prep schools. 🤔
It’s just a matter of numbers.
These specific programs don't require an entrance exam, and since they're often listed as second or third choices for many families, the application numbers naturally look higher.

It’s a shame they didn't include how many people applied to the schools that actually require testing.

Jason Ortiz5 said:So, what’s the actual point of high school anyway? Is it about actually soaking up a broad range of knowledge, or is it just some way to grind kids down—basically making them bleed just to prove they're worthy of graduating from an "elite" prep school?

And honestly, what’s the point of your question?
Entrance exams exist so students can see exactly what they need to know before they even step foot in the building (and maybe pick up some extra credit points along the way).
From what I’ve looked up, schools with an advanced math track have slightly tougher entrance tests than those with a standard curriculum, and I think that makes total sense. If the exams were so brutal that they couldn't even fill their classes, the schools wouldn't bother with them. But clearly, they aren't that extreme.
The high schools holding entrance exams this year cover all sorts of different programs and are spread out across various parts of the city. It’s totally expected that a student might end up taking two different exams, if they even do that—most will probably just pick a school with an exam and use the others as backups.
You might have some kids who end up with slightly lower scores—maybe because they struggled a bit in middle school or their GPA took a hit—but they still have enough to meet the threshold. They might end up sitting for all seven exams to try and make up those 10 missing points. But hey, that’s also a bit of a litmus test to see if they’re actually cut out for a rigorous high school environment and if they can handle the pressure of having multiple tests in a single week. Because once they get into high school, they’ll be dealing with that kind of workload for four years straight.
(Which, by the way, is exactly what you're saying here)

Scott Booth said:It’s going to be a grueling stretch: trying to stay focused for five straight days while tackling six out of seven final exams for high school entrance prep.
The one silver lining? They really only need to nail just one of those tests to make it happen.

That doesn't seem right. I honestly think most students only end up taking one or two entrance exams.
First off, not all high schools have the same curriculum. Even when looking at specialized STEM academies, it's unlikely a kid would want to sit for every single one—especially since some programs are way more math-heavy than others.
Plus, the locations are pretty spread out; traveling between a school on the north side and one downtown can be a huge hassle.

But I agree with the sentiment. If they can't manage to stay focused for a week of exams, they probably aren't ready for the intensity of high school, where they'll be living this routine for the next four years.

northerntiger9 said:With all due respect to everyone here—IT professionals who actually have the chops to thrive in the private sector, regardless of what specific degree they hold, aren't going to find much luck chasing teacher salaries. We're seeing a massive trend toward negative selection in public sector hiring lately.

The real issue with education budgets is that too many people (including a lot of unnecessary perks) are eating into the funds meant for high-quality teachers. This ends up squeezing the pay for the great educators, while those who lack quality but can't find work elsewhere (or simply don't want to seek it out) stay afloat on public funds.

And honestly, there’s no sense in forcing schools to stay open just because there's available staff right now, a principal's salary to cover, or a building that costs more to heat and light than a county would spend on busing ten students to the next town over. Then you have the extra costs for new teachers who might not live in that small rural area and need travel stipends just to show up to work in the middle of nowhere. (Though if you haven't noticed, in places without public transit, the mileage reimbursement under the new collective agreement is actually quite decent and bumps up their pay nicely—someone might end up spending as much on gas driving to a remote spot as someone in Chicago does commuting across town, even after the stipend.)

In my opinion, we're spreading ourselves too thin by funding computer science for grades 1-4, and even for the mandatory classes in grades 5-6 🤷. I think those hard-to-find tech specialists should be moved to high school, or perhaps even general prep schools should offer more computer science hours. We could also focus on developing specialized schools like the ones > linked if we really want to provide quality education to kids who show an interest and talent in that field.

Sadly, enrollment quotas for physicists and mathematicians at major research universities haven't increased in years, while chemistry spots aren't shrinking either (even though there's supposedly a shortage). The only group that stays steady is theology students at their university, and there are plenty of them! It's wild how various instructors or experts without any teaching credentials can step in to cover for absent or missing math and physics teachers. You have to wonder when kids will start being taught math by theologians (if they aren't already 😲). Sure, the pay is lower when you're just a temporary substitute, but it gets the job done... regardless of whether the kids actually learn anything useful.

hiddendriver34 said:Honestly, I don't think it's brutal at all. In fact, I love the idea. As long as kids can actually leave school behind the second they walk out those doors, I'm on board.

If we’re talking about extending the day for 1st through 3rd graders—which is basically what this "all-day schooling" rebranding is—most kids with average abilities, paired with a solid primary teacher and a good after-school instructor, can pretty much forget about school the moment those doors close at, say, 3:30 PM.
However, by 2nd grade, and especially by 3rd, a fair number of kids—whether they are gifted or struggling—just don't fit into that mold.
The high achievers get bored sitting around waiting for everyone else to catch up, while the kids who struggle (or have attention issues) aren't getting the specific support they need to master the material at their own pace.
And all of that assumes both teachers are highly skilled, know how to maintain discipline, and can keep kids motivated. Unfortunately, that isn't always the case.
I honestly don't even want to imagine what that looks like for 4th graders (since some schools offer after-school care then too) or the older kids in middle school.

Also, the concept of full-day schooling should be fundamentally different from just extended daycare hours. The idea that everything academic should happen within school walls is fine in theory, but it ignores the fact that many kids show zero interest in classroom subjects but are incredibly engaged with things outside of school—not to mention the kids who are naturally athletic or hands-on. If we force kids into a rigid school schedule for most of their waking hours, we might forget that we actually need future athletes, cellists, or kids with technical skills who know how to fix things or even just heat up their own lunch.

Making full-day schooling an option? Sure. But introducing it into American schools just because our instructional hours are lower than in other countries? No, no, and no.
The whole thing feels a bit messy, especially since credit was given for the project, yet just a few months before the start, we still don't even know which schools will be participating.
Personally, I think it would be wonderful if the funds that cities like New York currently spend on after-school programs were transferred directly to the Department of Education instead. Maybe that's the one silver lining here—simply because major cities are running such massive deficits, and it seems like we clearly can't afford to hire more childcare providers through local budgets alone.
Since the funding is being increased anyway, we might as well use it wisely.

rowdypanther12 said:If those two hours are optional, then that’s great.
I mean, imagine if you need help staying late to finish some schoolwork, and then you want to hit up a Starbucks on the way home. That would be perfect.
But if they actually have to stay for those two hours, that sounds pretty rough.

That prep school—I can't remember the exact name—officially runs from 8 AM to 4 PM, and then kids stay late if they haven't mastered certain subjects. For example, if they're struggling with physics, they stay after class with the teacher to work through it. On paper, it looks amazing and great for enrollment (and it should be motivating), but it really frustrates teachers who feel forced to stay late. Plus, I've heard from the kids that they end up having to study at home anyway just to make sure they actually retained what happened during the day.
At the end of the day, how much a kid actually learns depends on the quality of the teacher and the student's own focus. If you get stuck with a mediocre teacher, you're essentially stuck with them all day long, instead of being able to have a parent help out or hire a private tutor, which is more realistic for most families.

I think it would be the same situation in elementary schools.
It makes sense for the younger grades, but for the older ones, it’s honestly a bit much.
We have to be realistic here; not every teacher is top-tier at keeping kids aged 8 to 17 engaged, and our schools aren't all equipped with enough facilities to let kids burn off energy through sports for two hours a day—like having access to pools, decent fields, or a wide variety of sports to choose from.
It’s fine to offer an extended day program rebranded as full-day instruction for elementary schools across the country, but forcing it onto every single student in every school is just unnecessary.
And let's be honest, where are they going to find enough teaching assistants to cover three or four hours a day for everyone? They won't be able to afford it.

Sarah Hall53 said:You don’t live in a sleepy little town like I do, so you're probably looking at this whole emigration thing through a pretty simplified lens. We aren't just talking about twenty-somethings looking for adventure here. We’re talking about people in their thirties and even forties who end up packing up entire families—both spouses and all the kids—to head overseas. It’s usually an incredibly gut-wrenching decision, too, and most of the time, the hardest part is the kids—having to pull them out of their schools, their classrooms, and away from all their lifelong friends...
When that same kid has to spend an hour and a half commuting to school every single day with multiple transfers—whereas somewhere else abroad, everything is just more organized and efficient—the choice becomes a no-brainer. And that leads to a situation where it isn't just one person leaving the US, but four or five at once. Once two or three of those children stop seeing America as home after such a short time, they are essentially lost to us forever.

But hey, if a country views education as nothing more than a drain on the budget, then maybe it doesn't even deserve them.

First off, migration is just a natural part of life and something every country deals with. My own sister actually moved abroad, and she didn't exactly leave because she had to—she already had a great career lined up and wasn't living in some tiny, isolated town. 🤷
My parents actually came from out in the middle of nowhere. To get through high school, they had to move to Washington, D.C. At first, they were commuting every single day from their small hometowns just to get to class, but eventually, their parents helped them out by paying for some boarding houses nearby. Once they finished their education, they decided to stay in the city—mostly because there just wasn't any way to practice their professions back home in the sticks. 🤷 Well, honestly, what can you do? Things happen.
It’s a bit of a different story compared to them. For the last thirty years, we've seen massive numbers of people moving to Washington, D.C. to train as doctors, dentists, and speech therapists, and once they settle in, they rarely head back to their hometowns. It’s a shame because places like Indianapolis, Savannah, Des Moines, or even Asheville are practically starving for those kinds of specialists. I haven't really seen anyone making a big push to open up new universities just to train a handful of doctors who might stay in a place like Asheville—and honestly, there's no guarantee they will. 🥳
Third point: all those countries we keep hearing about—and even Washington, D.C., if they don't end up relocating to a different region entirely—are investing heavily in infrastructure. That includes public transit, of course, but if we’re really talking about what makes a family decide to stay put, it’s not just about high schools. For me, it always comes down to the basics: having reliable childcare and making sure there's a pediatrician within a reasonable driving distance. 19 miles)

Gas prices are climbing again, and honestly, it feels like they aren't going to stop anytime soon. It makes me wonder: if that tiny percentage of teachers who drive to work every day can't cover their own commuting costs, what happens next? I have a feeling it won't be enough. Will we end up seeing people turning to the teachers' union to demand travel reimbursements? Or will the district just try to push more online learning as a workaround? That’s the thing—in a lot of areas, that isn't even a realistic option. We still haven't solved the issue of reliable, high-speed internet infrastructure in many communities, let alone making sure every school is actually equipped with the right tech. It’s a tough spot to be in.

I still can't shake the feeling that this is mostly about protecting jobs for history, religion, and art teachers. It feels like they're just trying to keep people employed in those roles until they hit retirement age. Once everyone reaches pension age, then maybe they'll finally feel comfortable letting some of these majors be phased out.

By the way, I’ve noticed that school buses work pretty seamlessly in some of our smaller towns to get elementary students around. Honestly, I don't see why we couldn't do the exact same thing for high schools. It feels like there should be much more momentum behind an initiative to roll this out for older kids, too.
Beyond just making life easier for high schoolers when they're commuting, opening up more school options would be a huge win for everyone involved—plus, local transit companies could finally see some decent revenue. I honestly think we’d even see plenty of teachers opting for the school bus over dealing with the headache of buying a car, paying for repairs, and constantly hitting the gas station.

I honestly feel pretty bad about how Amtrak has fallen apart. It’s such a shame that we don't have reliable, well-covered rail routes anymore, especially out in the Midwest where the flat terrain would be absolutely perfect for it.
Beyond being better for the environment, it's actually safer and much faster, too. But honestly, with so many different options out there, that’s rarely been the priority.

Frank Scott said:There was supposed to be a public call for schools—or maybe there wasn't, I honestly have no clue. But from what I’ve gathered, only single-campus schools can even apply. Then again, I read somewhere else that it’s only going to apply to the elementary grades at first—basically just for the kids already in after-school programs—but who knows if that's actually true...

I really hope this stays limited to the younger kids for a while, maybe for at least the next two years.☕
I mean, the idea of teenagers stuck in all-day school programs feels a bit much, doesn't it?😱

I’m hoping this topic doesn't actually affect my family, and I'm mostly just reading this because I feel like I should stay informed, but I can't help but weigh in:

As of late May 2022, we still don't have any transparent data on which specific schools will be receiving these millions in funding from the federal loans that our generation will be paying off until the end of the century.🤔

Also, regarding the meals provided during these full-day programs, will that funding go directly to the Department of Education, or will local municipalities (like Washington, D.C.) still be footing part of the bill while parents cover the rest? In other words, will the food actually be free for the kids?
Will the cost of after-school care, which is currently split between the city and parents here in Washington, D.C., be shifted entirely to the federal government?

If they are simply rebranding "after-school care" as "full-day schooling," there might need to be some adjustments—maybe small ones, but important ones. For instance, they'll need to redefine employment contracts for the teachers working these programs, since their current pay often depends on parent contributions.

So many questions, and apparently so little time!

Sarah Hall53 said:It’s not just kids from that specific town enrolling in that school—students from all the neighboring areas sign up too.
And honestly, you just can't compare the public transit situation in Washington, D.C. to what it's like out in the middle of nowhere near Memphis. Seriously, I mean it—sometimes you literally only have three buses showing up all day, like one at 7, one at 2, and one at 8... so good luck trying to get anywhere.

That’s exactly why we need to focus on improving transportation. It isn't just about the students, either. I think it's pretty ridiculous to expect every teacher to own a car and commute long distances every single day.

Honestly, people are leaving these rural areas for a reason. Just because there's a high school in a tiny little town doesn't mean it'll stop the exodus; it might keep teachers there until retirement, but the local government needs a better strategy than that.

Besides teacher salaries (and those massive commuting costs since not everyone lives locally), you also have to factor in the utility bills for the building, which are going to be sky-high this coming winter.
That total cost eventually trickles down to everyone's taxes, so I don't really get the complaining about closing schools.
For elementary schools, sure, maybe. But for high schools? It doesn't make sense.

If I were to add anything, I'd say the problem is also keeping vocational programs that aren't even in demand anymore (since kids learn things differently now). Some schools stay open just to keep jobs available for teachers across the entire USA.
(Like a photography major, for example)

Sarah Hall53 said:Just wanted to jump in here with a quick correction because some of this info is a bit off—unqualified substitutes actually get hired within five months, and then we see the exact same job openings popping up every single five-month cycle. The absolute longest anyone should be stuck waiting for an emergency substitute position before a formal job posting goes live is two months, or about 60 days... though honestly, that "emergency" loophole is being abused way too often in a lot of school districts lately.

And seriously, if we just keep shutting down schools and vocational programs in smaller towns, we can't act surprised when everyone moves away. We need to build things in places where fifteen-year-olds don't have to spend three or four hours every single day just commuting on public transit and waiting around just to get their high school diploma.

Oh, I didn't realize that! I actually just figured it out from talking to someone else—apparently, if you pause the exchange for a few days, you can just pick them right back up again.
I’ve been wondering lately when we might see more math or computer science teachers entering the classroom, especially considering how many students are actually enrolling in those programs right now.
It honestly feels a bit absurd that they won't just close down that specific program for a few years. If they actually increased the enrollment quotas for math and related fields instead, they could finally make up for all the talent we've lost to hands-on industry roles or people moving away from the States.

I completely agree with Michelle Nelson4 on this one. For smaller towns, increasing the bus routes is definitely the way to go—it’s just much more cost-effective than trying to hire more teaching staff. Since all those teachers are funded through the federal budget, once you divide that pool of money among everyone, there isn't much left over to provide decent salaries for the teachers managing standard, if not overcrowded, classrooms.
I honestly don't get why a teacher would bother putting in all that extra effort for just a handful of students, especially since they’ll be heading off to different colleges or starting jobs the second graduation rolls around anyway. 🤷

By the way, speaking of travel:
There are some really fantastic vocational schools over in Annapolis, Sioux Falls, and Madison. It makes me a little sad to think about it, but honestly, it’s just such a bummer that Amtrak can't seem to level up. I’d love to see more frequent service, high-speed options, and actual air conditioning in the cars! It would be so much better for the environment and a lot safer, too. Plus, if we had better rail connections, it would take so much pressure off the traffic in Washington, D.C.
Honestly, I think trains are such a better way to travel than buses. I was reading about how they handle things in the Netherlands—apparently, it’s completely free for all students there! It makes me think that if we had something similar here in the US, where train travel was just ten minutes away from everywhere, it would be a total game changer for everyone.

Michelle Nelson4 said:

I was just sitting here thinking about how quickly the season seems to be slipping through our fingers. It feels like only yesterday we were discussing spring plans, and now suddenly we’re staring down the heat of July. I find myself caught in this strange loop of wanting to soak up every last bit of sunshine while simultaneously craving the relief of an air-conditioned room! It reminds me of that conversation Michelle Nelson4 was having earlier regarding the local weather patterns. She made such an interesting point about how unpredictable the humidity can be this time of year. I completely agree; one minute you're enjoying a lovely breeze, and the next, it feels like you're walking through a warm sponge. Anyway, I hope everyone is staying cool and finding some way to enjoy these long evenings. Does anyone have any good recommendations for light summer reading? I feel like my brain is turning to mush from the heat, so nothing too heavy, please! kaže:
I honestly have to wonder—do they just have no idea how many babies were born recently, or are they completely ignoring the data on how many kids will actually be enrolling this year? It feels like such a massive oversight.
🤔

They certainly know what's going on... but it’s the teaching staff that really tells the story here. It feels like there's just no real appetite to get things organized properly. I've mentioned this before—it isn't necessarily that we're running short on teachers (well, maybe if you count math and physics), but rather that there is a total lack of will to consolidate schools and actually distribute the faculty where they're needed most. Since these are schools focused on minority language programs, I suspect the whole situation is a bit too politically sensitive for anyone to want to touch it.

We are facing a real shortage of math, physics, computer science, and tech teachers in many areas, along with foreign language instructors.

This is most likely a mix of politics and the simple reality that history, religious studies, and geography teachers won't have anywhere to go if they reduce class sizes or total instruction hours.

In plenty of smaller towns—honestly, as soon as you leave the Washington, D.C. area—math and physics classes are being taught by people without specific certifications. They end up using temporary substitutes for two months at a time because regulations won't let them hire someone long-term. Instead of taking math teachers from underfunded schools with fewer students and moving them to where they are actually needed, they're essentially wasting time and taxpayer money just to protect the jobs of religious studies instructors.😠

mellowskipper said:I completely agree. Honestly, this whole system of splitting schools based on ethnic lines—it's just madness, and it certainly doesn't help anyone integrate. I suppose things might be different in California, maybe there are specific language programs there, but you can't compare a place like that to Memphis... It’s just sad.
Why on earth do eighth graders have to go to Memphis and listen lectures about the war or stare at that slaughterhouse? Why wouldn't they take them to San Francisco or Yellowstone instead?
And what about the kids actually living in Memphis?
Susan James, sorry for bringing this up off-topic.
On-topic: I really hope they bring back those high school fairs next year where the schools actually present themselves to students. I thought those were great.
Do high schools have a specific coordinator for admissions that you can actually call?

A ton of high schools are holding open houses this month and next.
They actually started about two weeks ago.

For example, Lincoln High has theirs today, and Central High is hosting one this Saturday, June 4th.

Personally, I think walking through the halls is way more helpful than standing at a booth handing out flyers in 110-degree heat surrounded by crowds. 🤷
(Plus, the flyers usually just contain info you could easily find on the school website anyway.)

To be fair, I recently went to open houses at both a local public elementary school and a private academy, and it was pretty much the same deal: a swarm of smiling teachers and energetic kids. I didn't pick up anything new that I hadn't already seen online or heard from parents of older students, but hey, at least I got to stretch my legs and walk the halls.😬 🙂

That said, since high schools offer so many different specialized programs, it makes sense to go. You can ask a teacher questions that aren't answered on the site, especially since things tend to change from year to year.

Yesterday, there were open house events going on at the high school. It actually happened right 🙏 when that blue balloon walk was being organized too.

Did any other high schools in the area have their open houses yesterday?

nimblelynx7 said:Here’s some bizarre news. A school for schools. It’s this informal byproduct of recent education reforms.

https://www.nytimes.com/section/us-news

What’s your take on this?
What does stuff like this say about the actual state of our education system?

Personally, I think this is complete nonsense.
First off, they’re teaching kids curriculum meant for first grade ahead of time—so what? They’ll probably just be bored out of their minds.
Second, this is clearly reserved for wealthy families, which means anyone with enough cash can buy an unfair head start right from day one.
Third, do we even actually need "prep courses" for elementary school?

🤣🤣🤣🤣

At first glance, I thought you were just giving someone free advertising!
Intensive prep for first grade... 🤦

Kids already show huge differences when they start school (it's a topic that comes up all the time—whether they should already know how to read and write, or looking at the crowd of kids who took advanced language classes in preschool)
Generally speaking, kids who went to daycare or preschool are much better prepared than those who didn't, especially if they had access to "enriched programs" or just a slightly higher-end facility. 🤷
You also see massive gaps throughout their entire schooling depending on extracurriculars, how involved their parents are, and, obviously, how much money they have...
It's a tough situation.

By the way, if you want to prepare kids for school, teach them the basics: how to wipe themselves properly, how to tie their shoelaces, or how to pass a ball in gym class. Those simple life skills matter way more than recognizing letters on a tablet or doing advanced math early. ☕

mellowskipper said:The Department of the Treasury has its studies over at EJ, which is mostly just the diaspora looking for cheaper tuition options. Everyone picks up American English, and there are some Indians and Africans there too. The professors, naturally, teach at EJ; some are brilliant, while others—well, god help us—but they show up and teach regularly. I believe the tuition is around 7 or 8k dollars a year.

I wasn't actually asking about college, though; I was asking about high schools and how they manage things on campus...

I'm not quite sure what you were trying to get at there, but we're definitely talking about two different things🍿