Posts by Susan James

urbantinker8 said:To be fair, I actually enrolled my kids in a local school where there are definitely some incompetent teachers in the mix, mostly because it's right down the street. It just doesn't seem worth the hassle of driving them halfway across town for years just so they can get better at math or take Mandarin or fencing lessons.
Even in those "top-tier" private academies, you're still going to run into idiots. I’d probably end up hitting my head against a wall if I spent years commuting across the state just for them to realize the French instruction isn't nearly as good as I had imagined.

Signed.
It all seems a bit strange, I suppose.

You really need to hit your head against a toilet bowl...
when you force a language on a child that they don't want, don't enjoy, and struggle to learn—especially when it impacts their ☕
GPA and admissions.

The cutoff scores are around 75-76. He’s sitting at 72. Since his first foreign language grade was a C in seventh and eighth grade (his foreign language five was a B, but the second language doesn't count toward this), he passes with a C. He doesn't want to hear another word about French, let alone keep studying it. But the French grade is dragging his overall average down by 4 points. And of course, he doesn't have straight As.

I actually agree with her point for the most part. It seems pretty silly that students can only take the entrance exams once they hit a certain GPA threshold (and even then, even if they get all 10 points, it might not be enough to catch up to the kids with perfect grades since the points aren't weighted that heavily anyway).
Not to mention how strange it is to give credit for a language the kid won't even continue in high school (some schools don't even offer it, and some kids genuinely just don't want to study it).
A colleague of mine is dealing with a similar headache (unless things change in the coming years), except it's German. She didn't even choose it for him; it was just bundled in as the primary foreign language at their neighborhood public school.

Kate Jackson4 said:At our recent parent-teacher meeting regarding high school enrollment, Shell presented us with data showing how various schools rank on standardized tests and where their graduates typically head next... 😉

We’ve been pacing around the house trying to decide on a path. He isn't interested in a traditional prep school, yet it's difficult to gauge which vocational tracks actually appeal to him. He changes his mind daily...
It's absolute chaos. 😛
I suppose something will eventually click before the deadline hits...

On another note, when are these schools actually supposed to publish their requirements? They say the deadline is the 28th, which is just lovely... 😵
I'm seeing outdated information from last year on some school websites, while others simply point to a central district portal for all updates...
They certainly aren't in any rush... ☕

So, from your elementary school's perspective, it sounds like everyone is aiming for college, which makes those high school test scores pretty vital. 🤔

Dennis Alvarez2 said:That is the core issue right there. This information isn't being leveraged to move the education system forward at all; instead, it seems to exist merely as a way to prove that we've modernized our digital infrastructure.

But who else was it intended for if not the general public? Honestly, I doubt anyone outside of the administration, the parents, and the students even cares about this data. 🤔 Otherwise, what criteria would you even use to determine if a school is truly high-quality and successful if not through data like this? While it's difficult to measure everything, this provides a significant amount of insight.

Children are incredibly sensitive, and so much impacts their mental well-being—everything from family dynamics and school environments to peer relationships and even the economic situation. Making the wrong choice regarding a school, a college, or a career path can be particularly devastating.

The public can interpret things however they want...
you can't really change anything within the school system itself (other than putting pressure on the specific school your child attends to "gift" them an A, because you see how well everyone else is doing at other schools, and you worry your kid won't get into college if everyone else is getting handed top grades, so just look at the Series 🤦.....)

Actually, I wouldn't say you can't do anything. You can definitely encourage your child to love learning, to understand why knowledge matters, and to explore different resources and environments....
I've mentioned this in a few previous posts, but if you look at which colleges kids end up in and where those students graduated from, the range is so incredibly wide that it doesn't really tell you much about whether a specific school is "good" or not. What it does show is that you can encourage a student (even one who hasn't quite hit their stride yet) to achieve their dream of studying architecture, medicine, MIT, or psychology at a place like Harvard Kennedy School, regardless of whether they came from a top-tier prep school or a local public school, as long as they study hard and focus on what they love. After all, kids from elite private academies, vocational schools, and standard high schools all pass the SATs and entrance exams if they have the drive and solid grades....

Now, someone might argue that I'm just relying on anecdotal stories and hearsay, but honestly, those stories are often so encouraging when I'm working with kids who aren't following the typical academic trends. It really helps protect their mental health.

Dennis Alvarez2 said:Well, you should have said so right away! 🙂 I completely understand. 🙂

From what I've observed, the data mostly tracks the transition from elementary to high school and high school to college. Personally, I would find it fascinating to see how many children from "our" elementary school move on to universities versus those who stay at the high school level. However, I don't see a direct link—or perhaps I'm just missing it—connecting elementary school origins to specific college enrollments, though given the database they have, such a connection ought to exist. 🕺

It's called analysis and synthesis, for heaven's sake. Based on what data would you conclude whether a school is high-quality? From this Forum? From what other parents tell you? By tracking the experiences of your friends' children? How many kids from a certain school make it into a top state university? What do you consider relevant if you're just dismissing the Series with a wave of your hand? Evaluating school quality isn't exactly a simple metric.

In my view, the Series provides us with a wealth of invaluable information, offering very serious indicators regarding the caliber of a school. Of course, it doesn't mean the statistics tell you everything you need to know about a school, but these figures are certainly significant. This data speaks to the trajectory of a child's education, showing how much they've learned and what they've mastered, how prepared they are for high school, whether grades are being handed out easily or earned, whether the students are ambitious (as are their parents 😁), and the overall success rate of students within the educational system, among other things. If I had possessed this data when enrolling my own child in elementary school, I would have certainly chosen a school with ambitious and successful students, regardless of any criticism I might face. So, yes, it matters deeply to me.While I appreciate a positive and motivating classroom environment, I have always been rather uncomfortable with intense competition among students. Back when I was growing up, that kind of rivalry just wasn't part of the culture. Nowadays, it feels like kids are constantly walking a tightrope, blurring the line between healthy ambition and cutthroat competition.

I have a genuine fondness for statistics; while it isn't my professional field, I find myself passionately following and listening to statisticians as they parse through data to uncover patterns, anomalies, and trends. Despite the inherent flaws in data processing, these metrics provide us with incredibly valuable insights, serving as one of our most reliable indicators. Everything else tends to boil down to mere hearsay. That said, I would love for you to point me toward any other serious indicators of school performance—perhaps from the Series. Given how far behind we currently are, this database is truly top-tier.

We don't actually live in Washington, D.C., but you wouldn't believe how closely I follow the high schools there, and I've been lurking in this section of the Forum for quite some time now without posting. I am a firm believer in education, and anything related to it captures my interest.

This is exactly the kind of detail I enjoy. There is so much information to be read between the lines if one simply remains attentive and sensitive to the nuances.

Me too! 🙂 I have been following the Series since the fifth grade. I had no idea the Series dated back to the old days; it really is quite a legacy left behind by those former educators.

From everything I've peeked at in the Series, there is none of that info available.
The Series is great that it exists, but it needs to be interpreted by people who can see deeper than just raw numbers. Because, as I mentioned, you can interpret data however you want, and then you're right back to hearsay—just an illusion created by numbers.
It's a shame that the administration hasn't leveled the playing field; the folks at the Department of Education or various agencies aren't utilizing it enough, especially with the goal of improving the actual state of our schools. For instance, how is it possible that SAT scores and final grades in senior year differ so drastically in most schools? What does that tell us about the way tests are designed, about how grades are determined, or if it has anything to do with teacher turnover...

Though, I should add a massive disclaimer here: we are talking about grade inflation and unrealistic grading throughout elementary and middle school. There are just way too many A's overall (since not everyone can be perfect at everything), and then high school is chosen based on those exact same grades, presumably expecting kids to maintain that streak of straight A's through graduation. Plus, since SAT scores are shaped every year by the specific cohort taking them, the "objectivity" of those scores is also questionable. And when you look at the averages being used, they include everything from failing marks to perfect scores, and it makes a huge difference which grades are most common and how they shift the average. It would be wise to look at the number of F's, D's, and C's compared to the final grades... the administration really ought to look into that. The people designing the exams at the Department of Education should investigate, and it would be great if teachers looked at their own students' progress—whether through the Series or their own records (though I'm sure the good ones find out through other means). This should serve as a guide for them to either keep doing what they're doing or to start making changes.
The number of kids who jump from a 2 to a 5 in their final grade is incredibly small—though it does happen, and we actually have the data on it here in the Series. It works both ways, too. Personally, I don't think it's such a big deal if a child slips just one grade level above or below their average.

And let’s be real, the Series wasn't designed to be a tool for parents to pick out middle schools or high schools for their kids.
It’s easy to talk when a kid is right in the middle of the pack and fits in perfectly... but what happens when they hit a wall or drift way outside that average? What if you tell your child, "This prep school is perfect for you because they have the best scores on the SATs and the most consistent student averages," only for them to sit in a classroom, look around at their peers, and realize they just can't keep up? How does that impact their mental health? Who actually wants that for their child?
As you mentioned yourself, kids are already competing enough as it is...

hiddendriver34 said:I honestly believe that if you give kids the same curriculum in any school, they can walk away with the exact same level of education and knowledge. When you look at the data, it’s pretty obvious why certain schools consistently crush it on standardized tests: they just happen to enroll students who already have top-tier grades and have to pass an entrance exam to get in. Of course, there's always that catch—some kids come into high school with straight A's handed to them on a silver platter, while others had to fight tooth and nail for every single grade. But that reality applies to every student and every school across the country. It’s simple math, really. For instance, a powerhouse school like Newton High is going to pull in students who are statistically more prepared than the crowd over at Tesla, Inc. High School, so naturally, Newton ends up seeing those better test scores. It's not magic; it's just how the numbers shake out.

Look, statistics can only tell you so much. They won't predict exactly where your kid—or any specific child—is going to land in life. I mean, think about it: the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel student at Tesla, Inc. is almost certainly going to crush their exams way harder than the top performer at a place like MIT. Individual talent doesn't always follow the averages.

Look, if a kid is absolutely dying to get into a computer technician program, let them go for it—as long as they can actually get in. If they show up and perform at a high level, or even better, if they’re crushing it and sitting way above the curve, they don't even need to sweat the high school graduation exams. They'll be golden.

I honestly can't believe we're already talking about this. It feels like just yesterday we were shivering through the winter, and now, suddenly, the heat is cranking up and everyone is looking at the horizon wondering what the summer is going to throw at us. You know that feeling? That specific kind of restless energy you get when the days start getting longer and the air starts getting heavy? It’s like the whole country is collectively holding its breath, waiting for the season to truly kick off. For me, it’s always a bit of a mixed bag. I love the vibe—the BBQs, the late sunsets, that feeling of endless possibility—but man, the humidity can be a total beast if you aren't prepared. It’s like walking into a warm, damp blanket the moment you step outside. Anyway, I'm curious how you all are gearing up. Are you ready to dive headfirst into the sun, or are you already eyeing the AC unit and praying for a thunderstorm? kaže:
I honestly just wish they’d start enrolling the high schoolers a bit earlier this year. It would be so much easier to get the inside scoop firsthand so I actually know what to expect for next year. 😂

Look, there are plenty of us out there. 😁

Bold signature 👍

This series is such a great example of how much adults love diving into data. It also really shows how easy it is to cherry-pick numbers to support whatever point you're already trying to make. 🤷

So, I’ve been doing some digging into different universities lately, specifically looking at schools that require entrance exams. It seems like the largest group of applicants usually comes from those high-profile prep schools—which, honestly, is a good thing since they have their own rigorous testing, so you end up with much better-prepared students entering the mix.
ALILooking at the list of high schools represented—even if it's just one graduate from each—it’s pretty clear that students from some of those more "progressive" schools are actually pulling it off. They’re passing their entrance exams and getting into the colleges they want. When I say progressive, I'm talking about the ones where you don't see the best SAT scores or top-tier GPAs.
From what we’ve seen in this series, there isn't much info on how students actually fare once they get into those universities. We don't really know if they're thriving, struggling to keep up, or if they find themselves having to play catch-up just to stay afloat in their classes. It's interesting because you see such a diverse crowd enrolling at places like MIT—students coming from language academies, private schools, Catholic institutions, and all sorts of general high schools, not just the STEM-focused ones. Since they haven't implemented entrance exams yet, they're still relying heavily on high school GPA and graduation stats to make their decisions.
Fields like medicine or architecture make the process feel a lot more straightforward because you aren’t just relying on grades and SAT scores—there’s an entrance exam involved too. Based on what people are saying in this Series, it’s clear that students coming from private high schools or those specialized academies can definitely pass them. It isn't a massive group of kids, but it proves it's possible. It shows that you can actually walk away with solid knowledge from those types of schools, and it’s definitely not the end of the world if you didn't attend one of the top-tier prep schools or a major powerhouse like Harvard Kennedy School, which is where most applicants to those programs usually come from. On the flip side, I feel bad for the kids who can't even qualify for the entrance exams because their overall points are too low. That feels like a real gap in the system. From what I can gather, though, the entrance exams really level the playing field; you see students with decent B averages getting into places like the Harvard Kennedy School because they crushed the exam. It really goes to show how much that one test can change everything.

I would never advise a parent to choose a school based solely on its SAT scores or graduation stats. Honestly, you just can't boil down four years of growth, learning, and life experience into one single standardized test. It’s just not right to reduce everything a student goes through to a single final exam.
When a kid starts high school, the parent usually only pops into the building once or twice. At the end of the day, the student is the one who really needs to do the legwork—figuring out what the school actually offers, getting a feel for the vibe, and chatting with kids who are already enrolled. Open houses are such a goldmine for info, though I’ve noticed students often form their opinions on how hard a school is based on friends they know from sports or other clubs. From my own experience working with teenagers, I've found that they are actually pretty spot-on when judging if a school's workload is a good fit for them. Honestly, they have a much clearer perspective than parents do. Too often, parents try to guide the decision based on how things were back when they were in school thirty years ago, or they listen to office gossip from colleagues whose kids might be struggling. It’s easy to generalize and assume your child will have the same experience, but listening to the kids themselves is usually the way to go.

I really think this series is such a goldmine of data for the Department of Education and various agencies. It would be incredibly useful if they started looking closer at grade discrepancies—not just for seniors, but for all GPA trends—especially when it comes to elective courses.
For instance, looking at a school like Lincoln High, there are these massive swings in senior GPAs and SAT scores from year to year. It makes me wonder: is it just the specific mix of students coming through every couple of years? Or do we have a situation where one group of teachers is super tough (leading to lower grades but stellar SAT scores), while the next group is much more lenient, resulting in higher grades but lower test results? 🤷

rowdypanther12 said:In most developed countries, private schools aren't really a thing

Actually, they do. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. 😕 Even in places people constantly praise, like how everyone talks about the Finnish Private School system, they exist there too.
In some cases, though, they really are just geared toward expats or international families.

I noticed you mentioned proab. I'm not quite sure what you meant by that, but if you were trying to start a conversation or ask a question, please feel free to elaborate! I'm always happy to chat or help out however I can. kaže:
That's coming from someone who spends half their time spreading urban legends themselves!

What's the point of this? ovog Are you guys thinking about enrolling? 😕
Selective reading and nitpicking posts without actually offering any constructive feedback? That’s a tough way to engage.

I wrote this.:

Susan James said:Where did you actually read that if you didn't have perfect grades for four years, you aren't cut out for a prep school?
I never said that. My point is that there are plenty of kids who pass with high marks but still aren't suited for that kind of academic environment:

-Any kid who can't just sit down and study on their own during middle school isn't ready for a rigorous prep school.
-A child who finds it incredibly stressful to handle just a few tests a week isn't built for that lifestyle.
-A kid who skips hanging out with friends or traveling with their parents on long weekends just to maintain an A average isn't meant for that path.
-A child whose entire grade depends on one final exam—not just in one subject, but in most of them—probably isn't ready for that pressure.
-A child whose parent has to take vacation days just to help them finish projects and reading assignments likely won't thrive in a standard academic track; they might be better suited for vocational paths, maybe working at a Coca-Cola plant or training as a chef or pastry artist.

Kids with a 3.8 or 3.9 GPA typically enroll in these schools quite normally.
In Washington, D.C.
Sure, they might not get into those ultra-elite private academies, but honestly, who actually wants their kid studying relentlessly from dawn to dusk? This is the age when they should be falling in love, going to concerts, hanging out in the park, or just being teenagers.
There’s only a tiny percentage of kids who are truly mature enough to know at age 12 that they want to be surgeons and therefore need those top-tier schools.
But those kids are fine; they usually breeze through middle school. They might struggle a bit with gym or art, but even then, they often excel because they're so focused on everything else.

I still stand by everything that was said...

u postu If you look at my previous post from earlier today, I laid out exactly how people start building these myths about whether a school is "too hard" or "too easy." It’s a pattern I see all the time.

Susan James said:If an entrance exam for a dream school is too hard for a kid, then they just aren't ready for that specific school.
And I really stand by that.
I totally get the nerves, the lack of focus, or that crushing realization that one or two silly mistakes could ruin everything... but if the material is genuinely too difficult and they fail, then they aren't a fit for that program (regardless of whether they covered it in middle school or not). If they haven't covered it, that’s a much bigger issue within our education system, but from what I see, parents go to great lengths to prep their kids for these tests—whether through self-study or private tutors—often starting as early as 8th grade. I remember being in a used bookstore around October, and I saw a woman buying textbooks from decades ago to try and teach her child the fundamentals for a top-tier High School. She was listening to stories about rotating teachers, unqualified substitutes, bad classroom environments, and online schooling... and honestly, at the end of the day, all that matters is the knowledge the kid needs for that advanced curriculum. I don't judge her for it, though it did surprise me to see someone hunting for old textbooks like that.

Unfortunately, even now that the weight of the entrance exam score has been bumped up from 5% to 10%, it still doesn't carry nearly enough weight compared to GPA.

It's also really tough to comment on the whole "strict vs. easy" school debate. Kids vary so much in terms of talent, knowledge, and work ethic when they walk through the door. Some breeze through while others struggle, which eventually leads to these urban legends about how "hard" certain schools are.

It's the same deal with middle schools; some hand out grades like candy, some simplify the curriculum just to boost the number of A's, and others maintain such high standards that they simply seem "tougher."
But even with maintaining standards, you have to ask: what is the actual capacity and potential of the child?

By the way, I think we should scrap the "optional success" metrics entirely, especially the stuff with decimals. Just use grades from the core required subjects.
I'm sure the enrollment process would be way less stressful for everyone involved.

At the end of the day, if you know how to read between the lines, you'll understand this post

Susan James said:So from seventh grade 🤣 😂

The ones with older siblings are the ones spreading paranoia as early as third grade. 😠🍿

My daughter goes to some after-school programs where her friends are now eighth graders, and at both her sports practices and language classes, there are already high schoolers enrolled alongside the eighth graders. Plus, there are our friends' kids too.
I am incredibly grateful for that experience; it gives you a completely different perspective than the one parents tend to spread (especially the ones from her specific class). Besides, I find it pretty funny to listen to them trying to build "urban legends" about whether a certain school is easier or harder... I just sit back and smile through it.

I always love hearing how kids perceive the world... and I truly just take it all with a smile (and I'm always surprised at first by how much they differ from us, which is actually a great thing for the future).

rowdypanther12 said:Do you think kids just don't care because they aren't posting on the forum? 👋tf:
Kids don't even know what a forum is, let alone have the habit of sitting down to type out thoughts and chat like this.
Usually, they're completely absorbed in it, but once they hit the beginning of seventh grade, they start thinking about it more—asking older kids at practice about different schools and stuff like that.

So from seventh grade 🤣 😂

The ones with older siblings are the ones spreading paranoia as early as third grade. 😠🍿

My daughter goes to some after-school programs where her friends are now eighth graders, and at both her sports practices and language classes, there are already high schoolers enrolled alongside the eighth graders. Plus, there are our friends' kids too.
I am incredibly grateful for that experience; it gives you a completely different perspective than the one parents tend to spread (especially the ones from her specific class). Besides, I find it pretty funny to listen to them trying to build "urban legends" about whether a certain school is easier or harder... I just sit back and smile through it.

boldbadger1 said:It’s not really a crisis for us specifically—with her score sitting at 74.30, she’d almost certainly land a spot as a Radiology Technician (which is about 90% similar to being a Google designer; she isn't going to be a programmer anyway, a fact I can confidently gauge having spent over 20 years working in IBM), and maybe even a Google designer if the cutoff drops—which is a possibility, given how many people pulled straight 5s during those two weird COVID years. As a backup, Cleveland is only a quick train ride away.

I’m speaking in general terms here—it’s just a shame that kids who graduate with honors and want to pursue a career in IBM-related fields can't, simply because the demand is through the roof. And I assume our school in Savannah doesn't exactly have the capacity or the legal permission to just arbitrarily add more classrooms...

To increase the number of classes, you need both qualified staff and the right equipment on hand.
In this specific situation, making the call to limit admissions is actually a smart move for the school.

Carol Kelly3 said:I’m from Washington, D.C., where teachers basically hand out easy grades instead of actually doing their jobs, which is why this whole enrollment mess is such a joke. It feels like they're pushing me out of the city, so you shouldn't be surprised that I'm annoyed by the lack of effort. I mean, sure, it probably happens elsewhere, but I think it's a much bigger issue here.

The whole thing became a mess because parents were putting so much pressure on schools to get their kids into specific programs. Honestly, the specialized sports tracks are just as ridiculous—especially when kids drop out of them halfway through middle school—and some of those medical diagnoses feel a bit exaggerated too. When you take the massive population of Washington, D.C., and add everyone commuting in from the suburbs, those spots fill up incredibly fast...
We were actually debating the other day whether transit authorities should raise ticket prices for commuters coming from outside the city. Personally, I don't think that's the answer, since that would just drive more people to drive cars and create even worse traffic jams. But, following that logic, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to implement a residency preference point system, similar to how they handle preschool placements (since high school isn't mandatory anyway)....

Carol Kelly3 said:It’s honestly pretty sad that some of us actually have to consider moving just so our kids can attend the schools they deserve. But I suppose nobody cares about people like us. I bet those folks in New York City don't mind, since they probably use those inflated grades to hide the fact that they aren't doing any work anyway.

Why don't we all just pack up and move to Washington, D.C.? Then we can really drive those standards through the roof! 🤣

The quality of a school really depends on the students being enrolled. The real issue is that schools, terrified of not having enough applicants, lower their entrance requirements right from the start. This ends up letting in kids who aren't quite ready for that specific environment.
Speaking of entrance exams, in this kind of climate, teachers and principals would jump at the chance to use them (even though they'd actually get much better candidates), but parents would fight it because "exams are too stressful for children." In reality, for kids who are actually interested and talented, it isn't just stress—it's a thrill to show what they can do. My own kids mentioned that when they were applying for arts programs, they always had entrance exams, and they loved it. I also know kids heading toward specialized STEM academies who found the entrance tests way easier than regular school tests or competitions—especially if you actually know your math.

Another problem is that certain career paths are "in" right now. Parents want that "good job" for their kids, so they push them toward specific fields even if they aren't a good fit. This creates massive overcrowding in certain programs—kind of like how everyone tries to rush into tech hubs like Silicon Valley.
In Washington, D.C., you see a huge influx of students from all the surrounding states and counties because we have the dormitories available and the transit links are pretty solid for daily commuters.

Jeffrey Edwards5 said:At least they can still apply and try their luck if they can bump up their scores a bit.

True... assuming there's even an entrance exam to begin with.

Kate Jackson4 said:I suspect they set that threshold specifically to protect themselves regarding students with disabilities; it gives them plausible deniability if those students fail to meet the requirement.

Because honestly, a threshold is completely meaningless if you're setting it at 60 while everyone is actually enrolling with a 75.

Those kinds of cutoffs existed back in my day too, during the late 1900s. Back then, you’d see them printed in the local newspaper; nowadays, you just find them online.
It doesn't really have anything to do with students with disabilities, other than the fact that there were far fewer of them back then.

Setting a floor at 60 points actually makes sense because otherwise, a ton of high schools wouldn't fill their seats. If they can't fill their classes, they lose funding, and teachers could even lose their jobs.
And don't even get me started on the vocational schools.
The issue is that there are so many honors students that the spots fill up easily even with kids scoring 75... though maybe next year a 70 will be considered totally normal.
Plus, there's always an element of luck involved.
It feels like a bit of a lottery sometimes. On the flip side, you get to pick six schools, whereas we only got to choose two.

There are just fewer kids around these days... some families have moved away, birth rates are down... plus, there's been a huge surge in private prep schools, which definitely pulls students away from the public system.

Right now, things like web design or robotics and tech-focused academies are trending, so their entry scores are skyrocketing since they have limited spots, but even that could shift by next year...

Jeffrey Edwards5 said:

I don't know what to tell you. It’s just one of those things. kaže:
You really have to vet every school individually for those three electives alongside the core subjects—English, math, and a foreign language. Not every high school counts the same credits toward the final score.

Take Luciana, for instance. She’s aiming for a pre-med track but her strengths are definitely in geography rather than biology.

Another interesting update—Stuyvesant High School is adding a new STEM track this year. No entrance exam required, either.

What's the cutoff for applying?

I can't find that info anywhere. Maybe they left it out because it’s just going to be the same as the general one?

Every school gets to set its own cutoff score for applications. They don't all follow the exact same standard.
Some schools prefer to keep things more flexible by offering a wider range, while others set much stricter cutoffs, basically banking on high demand. The downside there is they run the risk of not filling all their spots during the first round of enrollment.

But honestly, even setting a cutoff at 70 doesn't mean much if everyone applying shows up with a 76 or higher.

Carol Kelly3 said:Even though you're using softer language now and backing off the insults toward parents—which is good—it's still unclear what someone meant by being arrogant when they say failing an entrance exam means you aren't fit for that school. In my case, someone could ace the exam with 100%, but due to inflated GPAs from other students, they might still lose out to someone who only got a 7 out of 10 on the exam. Are you suggesting, like some others, that the person who got 100% isn't right for the school, while the person with 70% is, just because the first one "failed" to hit a certain threshold?

You definitely don't have to get every single question right on the entrance exam.
I haven't actually changed my tone at all; I've always maintained that these exams just don't carry nearly enough weight compared to a student's overall grades.

But I will say this: if a student finds the exam incredibly stressful or feels like the material is just too difficult, then that school probably isn't the right match for them.

If I remember correctly, according to the updated district guidelines, if two students end up with the exact same total score, the tiebreaker goes to whoever performed better on the actual entrance exam.

rowdypanther12 said:Hey monstera, my colleague’s son is currently enrolling.
He scored a 4.8 in seventh grade and a 4.6 in eighth.
Could you please help him out and let me know which high schools in the area he might be able to get into?

What about the specific subject scores used for admissions?
Those grades actually matter way more than just the overall GPA since they determine the points needed for entry.

For example, if they can get into a vocational school, having B's in social studies might be enough, especially with how entrance exams are looking lately, because those subjects aren't weighted heavily there.
If they're aiming for a language academy, even a C in physics shouldn't be a dealbreaker; I actually know quite a few kids who applied—and are still applying—with grades like that.
Every school has its own cutoff requirements. As long as they meet those minimum thresholds, they should definitely apply. From there, it really just comes down to how many other students apply and what their scores look like compared to the competition.

rowdypanther12 said:Of course it isn't normal. Then you get those people acting all high and mighty, claiming that if you don't have a perfect 4.0 every single year, you don't belong in a top prep school. 😂Honestly, the whole system is so backwards it's starting to feel like Stockholm Syndrome.

Where did you actually read that if you didn't have perfect grades for four years, you aren't cut out for a prep school?
I never said that. My point is that there are plenty of kids who pass with high marks but still aren't suited for that kind of academic environment:

-Any kid who can't just sit down and study on their own during middle school isn't ready for a rigorous prep school.
-A child who finds it incredibly stressful to handle just a few tests a week isn't built for that lifestyle.
-A kid who skips hanging out with friends or traveling with their parents on long weekends just to maintain an A average isn't meant for that path.
-A child whose entire grade depends on one final exam—not just in one subject, but in most of them—probably isn't ready for that pressure.
-A child whose parent has to take vacation days just to help them finish projects and reading assignments likely won't thrive in a standard academic track; they might be better suited for vocational paths, maybe working at a Coca-Cola plant or training as a chef or pastry artist.

Kids with a 3.8 or 3.9 GPA typically enroll in these schools quite normally.
In Washington, D.C.
Sure, they might not get into those ultra-elite private academies, but honestly, who actually wants their kid studying relentlessly from dawn to dusk? This is the age when they should be falling in love, going to concerts, hanging out in the park, or just being teenagers.
There’s only a tiny percentage of kids who are truly mature enough to know at age 12 that they want to be surgeons and therefore need those top-tier schools.
But those kids are fine; they usually breeze through middle school. They might struggle a bit with gym or art, but even then, they often excel because they're so focused on everything else.

Carol Kelly3 said:So, things are actually worse than I thought. I don't really get why people aren't calling out those arrogant, insulting comments claiming someone isn't "cut out" for a specific school just because they don't ace the entrance exam.

Based on how this works, a student who is a straight-A student—someone going to a school where teachers don't just hand out easy grades—might end up with, say, 75 points if they have a couple of B's. On the other hand, you have someone who was an A-student only because of grade inflation, maybe sitting at a 3.7 GPA, and they walk in with 80 points. Now, if the entrance exam actually reflects real knowledge and the score ratio ends up being 9 to 7 in favor of that first student... well, according to some of the arrogant folks out there, that first student is just proving they don't belong in that school, while the second one is the one who truly deserves to be enrolled 🤣

If an entrance exam for a dream school is too hard for a kid, then they just aren't ready for that specific school.
And I really stand by that.
I totally get the nerves, the lack of focus, or that crushing realization that one or two silly mistakes could ruin everything... but if the material is genuinely too difficult and they fail, then they aren't a fit for that program (regardless of whether they covered it in middle school or not). If they haven't covered it, that’s a much bigger issue within our education system, but from what I see, parents go to great lengths to prep their kids for these tests—whether through self-study or private tutors—often starting as early as 8th grade. I remember being in a used bookstore around October, and I saw a woman buying textbooks from decades ago to try and teach her child the fundamentals for a top-tier High School. She was listening to stories about rotating teachers, unqualified substitutes, bad classroom environments, and online schooling... and honestly, at the end of the day, all that matters is the knowledge the kid needs for that advanced curriculum. I don't judge her for it, though it did surprise me to see someone hunting for old textbooks like that.

Unfortunately, even now that the weight of the entrance exam score has been bumped up from 5% to 10%, it still doesn't carry nearly enough weight compared to GPA.

It's also really tough to comment on the whole "strict vs. easy" school debate. Kids vary so much in terms of talent, knowledge, and work ethic when they walk through the door. Some breeze through while others struggle, which eventually leads to these urban legends about how "hard" certain schools are.

It's the same deal with middle schools; some hand out grades like candy, some simplify the curriculum just to boost the number of A's, and others maintain such high standards that they simply seem "tougher."
But even with maintaining standards, you have to ask: what is the actual capacity and potential of the child?

By the way, I think we should scrap the "optional success" metrics entirely, especially the stuff with decimals. Just use grades from the core required subjects.
I'm sure the enrollment process would be way less stressful for everyone involved.

feralgardener33 said:Hi there,
Quick question: besides the Harvard Kennedy School, are there any other high schools in the area with a STEM track that offers a curriculum entirely in English?
Thanks!

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy A53 using Reddit

The IB program at MIT is actually quite unique compared to other local high schools. It’s taught entirely in English, so it definitely isn't like a standard public High School.
So, just to clarify, MIT doesn't follow the typical English-track curriculum found elsewhere.

School X offers both STEM and general tracks, where some subjects are taught in English.
You'll find a similar setup at language academies (like the 16th or 4th ones) or over in Columbus.
Just keep in mind that it's usually just a portion of the classes taught in English, rather than the whole thing.

hiddenseal14 said:I am genuinely curious if they actually called them over at the district headquarters—you know, if they were even selected. Because the official documentation explicitly states that every single grade from 1st through 8th is supposed to be included.
And honestly, this completely wrecks the entire planned implementation schedule by grade level! Not to mention that their results won't even be comparable to the other schools participating in the pilot program. I truly doubt this is going to fly.

Well, looking at it logically, if they want to compare schools using CN versus those without CN, they absolutely need to have control and experimental groups starting from the exact same baseline.
That’s precisely why you should be tracking kids right when they enter 1st grade—some will eventually end up in CN, while others won't. You could even set up another control group with kids who aren't in CN but, say, attend an after-school program in downtown Chicago.
You also have to account for things like preschool availability and attendance.

The way they’ve designed this "experiment" just doesn't work because the kids aren't all starting from the same place. For instance, one kid might have had high-quality preschool for their first three years. They probably had tons of activities and, from what I know, a very well-organized curriculum. They even identify gifted students and provide specialized support. How on earth are they going to compare those students to kids who spent their first six years of schooling without after-school programs, without extra enrichment, or maybe even without basic tutoring because their teacher was nearing retirement and wasn't focusing on those specific subjects?

From my perspective, it’s also a mistake to include students who started school during the 2019/2020 period. Those classes and students vary so much depending on how much isolation they dealt with and how differently teachers handled online learning—not to mention who was doing extra work with students at home.
Basically, the whole experiment feels poorly conceived because it's going to be nearly impossible to control for all these variables (and for that matter, I haven't seen any mention of which specific outcomes they’ll even be measuring).

So, the parents of future fifth graders here in Springfield who spoke up... besides potentially doing a disservice to their own children since these advanced kids don't actually need CN, they've essentially been lured into an experiment that won't produce any valid results.