Posts by swiftbear86

Daniel Gomez10 said:Actually, I have to disagree.
Back when I was in school (about 15 years ago), qualifying for the national math, physics, or chemistry competitions was based strictly on your total score from the regional rounds, not your rank.

I was just clarifying how things work in America, and I mentioned the formal complaints sent to the Department of Education.
For all the other subjects, the deciding factor was always the raw score.

I wouldn't be saying this if I hadn't personally drafted and sent a letter of protest to the Department myself.

wanderinggardener12 said:I am all for recognizing achievements at both the regional and national levels, provided they occur within any activity where the organizing institution holds a legitimate certification for working with children and youth.

What you mentioned regarding the competitions organized by the Department of Education is actually quite far from the truth. Quite the opposite, in fact. Scores are compared, and students qualify for national competitions based on their total points, not merely their rank within a single state. It is precisely the inverse of what you described: take an English exam, for instance, where there was a year when absolutely no one from Washington, D.C. was invited. Either we were simply incompetent along with our students, or perhaps certain regions were leaking test questions beforehand, resulting in five or six students from the same area walking away with perfect scores at the regional level.

There are so many fundamental issues that need to be straightened out before we can even begin to discuss "reform"—though I wonder which order we should address them in.

My oldest "test subject" is fortunately navigating college life, and my youngest still has baby teeth, but I truly feel for my former eighth-grade "test subjects." These were kids who were counting on points earned through sports or through music and dance schools—where they spent upwards of twelve hours a week practicing—only to see those efforts rendered useless because they let a 'C' slip onto their report cards.

Applying changes retroactively? That is absolutely unacceptable.

What I wrote is absolutely correct; I just didn't specify which year I was talking about.
Back in 2009, for the English competition, the key factor was regional placement, which is why I mentioned Azoo specifically. Students from Washington, D.C. had lower scores than students from Pittsburgh, who had 61 points, or Oakhurst, who had 59. Back then, there was a lot of pushback against the Agency because the criteria for English were different, whereas for every other subject, it was strictly based on raw scores.
The Agency's response was basically that's just how it works for English, but they wouldn't rule out changing it later. (I was teaching 7th grade back then).
I don't have the energy to go digging through old records right now. (I can't remember which Washington, D.C. Elementary School hosted the regional competition).
If I recall, the gap was about 10 points, so the kids from Washington, D.C. definitely got the short end of the stick.
Clearly, things have changed since then—I haven't kept up closely enough to know for sure.

That’s exactly why I think it's so vital to show up to public forums and write to the Department and the Agency if the rules aren't being applied fairly.☕

Wait, I found the year! Now I just need to find where the regional was held, but I'm wiped out for the day...

Rachel Jones8 said:So why compare that to athletic credits then? (It feels like it's being used in a negative way here.) 🤷
Do athletes get points just because they trained 4 or 5 times a week for years?
If points are only for winning major championships, wouldn't there be tons of those kids everywhere?

Completing music school—not just some random class—is an achievement. You're in class four times a week, dealing with ear training tests, and taking performance exams at the end of every year.

Success is also about sticking with something for years, training every day and playing games on weekends—whether it's soccer or anything else. I don't know about specific exams, but surely things like belt rankings in karate exist?
In sports, you have to show grit and dedication... if you don't, you're out. So if someone sticks with a club for years and keeps showing up, why isn't that worth something?
And honestly, if they actually win big at competitions, that should count for points just as much as any musical achievement, regardless of special awards.
Personally, I don't think these points should matter at all unless you're applying to a specialized arts or sports academy.

I’m with you on that.
If I were setting the rules, the only thing worth giving extra credit for would be making it to a national competition in a core subject. Maybe one point for participating, and then a little bump for the top three finishers at the state level or the regional level.
The problem is, even those competitions aren't always fair.
Right now, getting to the nationals depends on whether you rank at the very top of your specific region, rather than just having a high enough score overall.
That might have changed recently, but just a few years ago, you could have a student in Washington, D.C. with way higher scores than someone in another state, yet they wouldn't even get an invite to the national stage because of how the regional cutoffs worked.
In my book, the only metric that should count is pure merit—basically, your actual score.

Jessica Chavez4 said:Because I didn't want to go anymore. Honestly, I only did it because my parents were bored, so they bought a piano. It looks classy, and it’s considered high status when your kid takes music lessons. Makes her look refined, smart, and like she'll land a great spouse. You wouldn't get it.

But seriously, after all those years, I didn't even get the credit. Looking at it now, it seems like the number of extra points available has skyrocketed since I was in school. Even back then, we dealt with massive grade inflation and vague criteria. I can't even imagine how much worse it's gotten over the last fifteen years, considering how messy it already was. I remember having about fifty-seven points, and my parents were practically pulling their hair out trying to make sure I got into prep school—they were borderline panicking. But they were always like that. Personally, I regret getting into that specific school; if it had been more laid back, I could have actually caused some trouble there. But, yeah. 🤷

Which school would you pick now, and why?
Why wouldn't a prep school be a good choice if you plan on going to college later?

There are plenty of agencies out there that provide medical home care services.

http://www.sanatorij.com/medicinska_njega_u_kuci.html

Nicholas King said:Well, if we're being strictly accurate, completing just four out of the six grades in elementary music school would have been plenty.

Spot on.

I can't shake the feeling—even in this thread—that people are constantly trying to downplay every single achievement, every bit of hard work, and even the big milestones like getting into a top-tier prep school.

Rachel Jones8 said:Can someone who actually gets this explain it?
Are they stripping points from artists (dancers and musicians) just for attending those specialized arts academies? Or is it about losing points for winning national or major competitions?

Parents and teachers are losing it over the proposal to cut two extra points for students graduating from dance and music academies when applying to high school. Instead, only one point would go to kids aiming for arts schools. Meanwhile, student athletes can still rack up points for any school application. Students taking first, second, or third place in national or international competitions earn between one and three points, while winning first place at the state level earns them one extra point.

Were those two points earned just for finishing the program, or did you have to hit some massive milestone?
So kids weren't getting points for training for five or six years, but only if they pulled off an elite athletic win?
Did I get that right? Athletes didn't get special perks either, just one point for a state title—which is the same thing arts students get just for graduating without even winning a competition... or am I totally off base? 🤷

Just finishing up middle school music programs was enough to qualify.
Completing a formal music conservatory program (not just a weekend workshop) is a real achievement. Think about it: classes meet four times a week, you’ve got theory exams, and you have to pass practical performance tests every single year. As for the cost—in New York City, you're looking at about $40 a month for music school. Honestly, most families spend way more than that on stuff like dining out or entertainment, so saying this is only available to the "elite" just isn't true.

Here is the old (but still relevant) set of guidelines:

Sarah James4 said:Unbelievable... and this is supposedly the best the Department of Education can come up with. It’s not just that the government is claiming the right to dictate someone's career path and interests—basically deciding what kids will be doing for the rest of their lives starting at age 15... but we're actually doubling down on this whole system of creating an "elite" class through high-scoring schools versus everyone else. Now, they want to start pigeonholing them even earlier, around 10 or 11 years old. 🤦 It’s chilling. The way people view education in this country hasn't really changed since the days when the working class just learned trades while the privileged or scholarship students went on to become lawyers or doctors.

What kind of criteria do you think should be used for high school admissions?

I finished college a long time ago, and I didn't have any special help—not through money or connections.
I just studied hard, got into the high school I wanted, and later made it through university based on my own merit (without needing fancy prep courses for entrance exams).
I don't consider myself part of some "elite" class.
But I truly believe that academic success—and more importantly, actual knowledge—should be the standard for getting into any school or college.
The responsibility lies with the teachers to remain objective. They shouldn't let a student's charm or a parent's influence sway their grading, nor should they hand out high marks just to be nice when the student clearly hasn't mastered the material.
Of course, in a society like ours, fighting against those windmills takes a lot of energy.

rowdypanther12 said:🤣🤣

I don't know, this all feels a little strange to me. It's fine to strive for excellence and all that, but looking back at my middle school, we maybe had 4 or 5 students in our entire grade who actually maintained straight A's from 6th through 8th grade. That really was something special.
Sure, we were a tough school that loved to brag about that reputation 🙄, but most kids got by with B's. Only the truly exceptional ones were pulling 4.5s or higher; there might have been maybe ten of them per class at most. And everyone with B's could pretty much enroll in the high schools they wanted, provided they had an A in the specific subjects required.
It feels like things aren't like that anymore—like it's just assumed kids will get A's and the standards for what counts as an A have just shot way up.
Maybe I'm wrong. 🤷

Our school has about 300 students enrolled (all honor roll students).
If you look at the total number of students in the whole county, I don't think having that many honor roll kids is actually an indicator of "grade inflation."

Believe it or not, the Department of Defense actually sent me a "thank you" note for participating in the public discussion regarding the new enrollment criteria.
And hey, if any of my comments actually make an impact, I can tell you that putting my full name out there felt worth it.

There’s really no reason they wouldn't give you the referral if the specialist already scheduled a follow-up for a specific time.

You didn't mention which specific medication you're talking about, but look—your doctor sees your entire medical history and full treatment plan. It’s entirely possible they feel one of those meds isn't actually essential anymore. Basically, if they don't see any active symptoms, they might decide to taper your dose or stop the prescription altogether.
It's hard to say for sure, but doctors aren't just robots who blindly follow specialist guidelines.
Plus, a lot of patients see multiple specialists, so it's pretty common for different treatments to overlap.

Nicholas King said:Actually, you could have hit that 61-point mark without necessarily having a perfect GPA—say, if you had lower grades in electives that don't even count toward admissions, provided your overall average stayed high enough.

I remember one student who got a D in an elective back in middle school. As soon as they turned in their application, the administration basically told them there was no point in even bothering. But, after the parents stepped in and had a serious sit-down with the principal, the kid ended up getting enrolled with exactly 61 points.

They ended up enrolling nine different classes with 33 students each, and every single one of them had at least 61 points.

Lisa Myers said:I've got a question—my doctor has this very specific thirty-minute window every single day when you're allowed to call for prescription refills. It's for my daily medication, just a standard refill request. If you call outside that tiny window, you can't get through; you just get a lecture from the nurse and an instruction to try again at the "correct" time. So, I've been trying to call since Wednesday. The line is constantly busy. Honestly, it feels like she just sets her phone to "reject all calls" during that time. There's no way it's actually that busy; she probably just doesn't want to be bothered while she's working. This isn't even the first time, either. And if I decide to show up in person, I have to sit in the waiting room just to ask for a simple refill.

Is she seriously allowed to do that? Just thirty minutes a day and you're out of luck? I'm down to my last dose tomorrow, so I'm stuck choosing between driving all the way there or going without until someone finally decides to pick up the phone.

Your doctor is completely disorganized.
You could file a complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services or Medicare regarding her lack of availability,
or you could just find a new doctor.
It’s obvious everyone is calling during that same half-hour block, so naturally, it's impossible to get through.
But look, plenty of other clinics run perfectly fine, so I think the issue here is pure bad management—and maybe a little bit of an attitude problem.

Susan James said:And honestly, there are already way too many honor students... if we really "must" have this kind of pressure regarding grades, then let it start in 5th grade. We shouldn't have a situation where Pero wakes up from a long winter nap in 7th grade and tries to cram three years of missed material into three months just because he realizes he needs those points for high school admissions.
(I want to believe that there are still some teachers out there—the ones who aren't easily swayed—who will step in during 8th grade and give a fair grade, though I doubt they'll be handing out A's all year long...)

Maybe I’m being too optimistic, but I truly believe that if a student starts focusing on building their academic profile in 5th grade, they'll actually learn how to read critically, master study habits, memorize multiplication tables, and nail all those fundamentals. Instead, they'll end up relying on intense tutoring sessions by the time they hit 7th grade.🥳

It wouldn't work even under the current system.🤷
From what I've seen over the last few years, places like MIOC were mostly filled by kids who participated in competitions or kids from "broken homes" (meaning families with higher social status who could leverage extra points).

This isn't just about high school admissions; it's a systemic issue within our entire K-12 education system.
It's also about parents who are perfectly happy with an A (or a D) without ever bothering to check if their child actually understands the material or not...

I’d go as far as to say that you can tell which schools a kid comes from based on the gaps in their knowledge. Some teachers leave such huge holes in certain subjects that it's hard to take the grading seriously at all.

Christian Lee13
- elective courses should only be taken if you're expecting an A; otherwise, there's really no point in letting them drag down your GPA.

That’s actually how things work right now.
The only exception is religion class, which basically gets added automatically.
And honestly, it's just plain silly to think you can even grade someone's "faith."

Yeah, this is a huge injustice.
At the same time, I feel like giving points for any extra school, sport, or activity is also unfair. No matter how much time and effort it takes, or how much it shows a kid is motivated and hardworking, it always comes down to having the money to afford it. It puts all the focus on the final "achievement" rather than the actual journey. I know some parents just can't afford to enroll their kids in fancy dance academies or prestigious music conservatories. Some kids are incredibly creative and independent—they teach themselves to code, build amazing things, or start their own bands—but they won't get any credit because they don't have a certificate from some big-name instructor.

At Nike, anyone with 61 points could get in, and if you're wondering how they reached that number, that's for the admissions board to explain.
Basically, having all five standard requirements plus good conduct (grades in 7th and 8th grade) landed you at 61 points.
The points from competitions and High School were really just bonuses.

We got in without any issues—no divorces, no special social status stuff, and no medical waivers needed.
Success + behavior + state exams + High School = 64 points.

goldenjackal43 said:Good grief, a national competition worth zero points 😲

This is genuinely tragic. We lose the high school graduation requirements, we lose the entrance exams, and now, apparently, we’re losing the competitions too. It means everything is left entirely up to school board politics and the whims of individual teachers. Honestly, it just opens the door wide for favoritism and corruption.

People claim that graduation exams or entrance tests are "too stressful"? Then what exactly do they think this current mess is? There is no room for compromise here, and there is no way to actually distinguish yourself through merit. If someone happens to be one of the top five math students in the entire country, yet they have to deal with tears and frustration because some gym teacher decided to be "strict" and block their path to the specialized academy where they actually belong, then you truly know the system is broken.

Forget about actual knowledge; forget about personalized learning. Instead, we're teaching kids from day one how to play the game and suck up to authority just to scrape by with decent grades. And then we act surprised when they show up to college and completely fall apart. Honestly, I’d be struggling too if I had to fake my way through grades in college, especially when you've been conditioned since childhood to resent the very idea of learning.

Yeah—it’s a disgrace. Zero credit for competing at the state level.🙄

And just so I’m not just venting here, I actually filled out a public comment form and sent it over to the Department of Education. Even though I don't have any skin in the game regarding high school admissions anymore, this still needs to be addressed.

placidpilot said:I hope I’m asking this in the right place...

So, I'm moving to Washington, D.C. permanently very soon, and obviously, I need to switch my doctors there too. How does that actually work? Do I just head to the local Community Health Center in my new neighborhood, ask for certain forms, and then what? I'll be honest, I'm pretty clueless when it comes to this kind of paperwork 🙈 so if someone could walk me through the process like I'm five, I'd really appreciate it. 🙈

Thanks! 🙂

First thing you'll want to do in NYC is find a doctor who is actually accepting new patients.
Once you find one, they’ll give you a statement to sign, which you then take to the local Medicare office—you can find all the addresses on this site:
http://www.medicare.gov/info
That's where they'll officially register you under that doctor's care.
I'm not entirely sure if you need to bring over your physical medical records from your old doctor, or if they handle everything via mail.
It’s probably best to just ask at the Medicare office when you hand in your change-of-doctor form.
Just remember, until you get that paperwork turned in at Medicare, you can still use your old doctor's services.

I’m actually all for the idea of giving extra credit points to those 4th graders in elementary school.

If we start cutting back or getting rid of bonus points for winning competitions, the message we're sending to kids is pretty bleak: it basically tells them that going the extra mile and mastering a subject won't actually pay off here in the States.

Think about music school—that isn't just some casual after-school club or an elective you pick up on a whim.
It’s a serious institution. It requires regular attendance, intense practice, and passing formal exams. They even issue official certificates. For a student who has the grit to stick through a six-year music program, getting an edge during high school admissions isn't just "extra"—it's a well-deserved reward for their dedication.

But lately, it feels like there's this growing assumption that being smart, working hard, and behaving well doesn't really need to be incentivized by the school system.

Regarding that point mentioned above about Milo not hosting any competitors...
From what I understand, state champions from elementary school usually get a direct pass into certain programs every single year.
Milo is essentially the equivalent of a top-tier US magnet school for science and math.

Adam White5 said:Hello to all my fellow ladies out there. After surviving yesterday, I feel a deep need to share my experience with you all and ask for some perspective. I am 29 years old, and painful periods have been my lifelong companion. However, what happened yesterday pushed me right to the edge of my physical limits. Naturally, my period started on Friday—which completely ruined my weekend—and by Saturday morning, the mild cramps began. I decided to take three tablets of something relatively mild (a paracetamol blend specifically marketed for menstrual pain that I picked up during a trip to London), thinking I was being smart by trying to avoid overusing aggressive NSAIDs like Voltaren. About an hour after taking them, things went south fast. I was hit with intense nausea, sweating, and pain so excruciating that I drifted in and out of consciousness. I couldn't move; I couldn't even speak. It felt as though someone was physically reaching inside me and wrenching my uterus and internal organs around. I ended up in the ER, where the doctor gave me quite a look because I had taken paracetamol—look, I know it’s not the strongest option, but I was genuinely trying to scale back on the heavy stuff—and she ultimately prescribed Ibuprofen. I feel okay now, but the discomfort hasn't fully subsided, even with the Ibuprofen. Is it actually normal to endure pain so severe that you nearly pass out?
I make it a point to go to my gynecologist for checkups at least twice a year. I have always brought up these painful cycles, but the only solution ever offered is birth control, which is something I really don't want to pursue.

Maybe give Buscopan 80 mg a shot? You can grab those over the counter, and they usually run about $23.

Karen Lopez4 said:Nicholas Myers made a great point. Your "go-to" lab is simply the one your primary care doctor sends your samples to. Wherever your family doctor is located, that’s where your affiliated lab is. You go there for blood work, and then when your gynecologist refers you for something else, it doesn't matter what city that specialist is in.
If your primary doctor is in Washington, D.C., and your lab is also in Washington, D.C., your gynecologist could be located anywhere in the US.
The red referral slips don't really apply here. I assume your gynecologist gave you a solid printed referral, though they should have technically labeled the electronic version for the specific lab they were sending you to—which, I'm guessing, you helped them sort out.

That's not quite right.
Honestly, if you're going to make a phone call, you're better off just calling the lab directly to double-check everything.
🤷, I'd do exactly that.

So, does that mean if a student is staying in San Diego, she has to use the local lab there because that's where her primary doctor is based, even if she isn't living in NYC?

Either way, it's still unclear from the question whether the gynecologist actually sent an electronic referral or if they just suggested which tests you might need to get done.
In my opinion, it's probably best to just give the doctor who wrote the referral a quick call.

Eric Gray2 Asks:
I don't have a digital version; I just have some papers printed out on standard letter-sized sheets. 🤔

To be honest, I’m really not sure how this whole electronic prescription thing is supposed to work now.
Honestly, your best bet is to just give the doctor who gave you that referral a quick call. Once you have that sorted, you should be able to head into any LabCorp or similar facility that accepts Medicare.