High School Guide: Admissions, reviews, and advice

Look, I’m not out here hunting for some perfect utopia. I’m just pointing out that the current setup feels unfair, much like how things used to be back when we were dealing with music programs. Honestly, it might be easier to just scrap those extra points altogether to ensure actual fairness, rather than pretending everyone is starting from the exact same baseline. From what I gather, the focus is shifting toward one-way instruction, which I assume is a necessary step if they want to make after-school activities more accessible by using school facilities in the afternoons. If that's the goal, then fine, I suppose that makes sense.

On another note, does anyone happen to have a direct link to that specific regulation regarding mutual accountability for categorized student-athletes? I'm trying to figure out if this is a nationwide federal standard or if it's handled at the local school district level. I've been digging through the archives, but there is just so much noise online—mostly outdated links and old news articles—that I ended up going in circles without finding anything useful.😵

I have never actually heard of such a regulation before. In specialized sports academies or those dedicated athletic tracks within high schools, I always assumed this was just standard procedure. As for regular public schools, I honestly figured it was just down to the individual teacher's goodwill—whether they felt like accommodating the student or not.
Having classes in the morning is generally a fantastic setup, especially for kids who are heavily involved in extracurriculars. It’s going to be a major deciding factor for our enrollment process, too. If we were stuck with an afternoon schedule, there would be absolutely no way she could make it to her practices on time.

Sent from my Sony Xperia using Reddit

That’s just the professor being incredibly kind-hearted. Maybe there’s some elite tier of athletes mentioned in the official handbook that I’m completely oblivious to, but I’ve never personally dealt with an athlete who had to schedule special exam times like that.

I managed to dig up some guidelines from the Board of Education back in 2019, but there’s absolutely nothing mentioned in there about this. I honestly can't be certain if it's the most recent version available, though. It’s possible the policy might vary depending on the specific school district...

On a side note, my daughter actually prefers the split schedule. It lets her catch a little extra sleep during the week, which is a lifesaver even on days when she has soccer practice at 8:30 AM.😁

My partner is obsessed with afternoon classes, even though he’s aiming for a school that only runs morning sessions. I honestly don't get it. Why can't these schools just move the first period to 9:00 AM at the very least? It would make everything so much easier.

The IV shift used to kick off right at 8:30 AM, but things have been a bit unpredictable lately since everyone’s been rotating through different shifts due to the earthquake...

I was just scrolling through the e-government portal, looking over some of the new regulations. It seems like there's quite a bit of a stir regarding those extra credit points for second languages—specifically the idea of using them for admission into language academies.
It actually makes sense, I suppose, but then you have to wonder why they aren't applying that same logic to computer science or technical high schools. Or even Catholic religious education.
The suggestion to scrap the GPA-based system is a decent one, in theory—it’s a solid idea—but let's be honest, that's probably never going to happen.

Sent from my PRA-LX1 via Reddit

Michelle Nelson4 said:Look, I’m not out here hunting for some perfect utopia. I’m just pointing out that the current setup feels unfair, much like how things used to be back when we were dealing with music programs. Honestly, it might be easier to just scrap those extra points altogether to ensure actual fairness, rather than pretending everyone is starting from the exact same baseline. From what I gather, the focus is shifting toward one-way instruction, which I assume is a necessary step if they want to make after-school activities more accessible by using school facilities in the afternoons. If that's the goal, then fine, I suppose that makes sense.

On another note, does anyone happen to have a direct link to that specific regulation regarding mutual accountability for categorized student-athletes? I'm trying to figure out if this is a nationwide federal standard or if it's handled at the local school district level. I've been digging through the archives, but there is just so much noise online—mostly outdated links and old news articles—that I ended up going in circles without finding anything useful.😵

Section 81

https://www.law.com/z/317/Title-IX-Education...

It says something similar in Title IX about how this can be facilitated. I'm not sure where the specific details are laid out.

hiddendriver34 said:That’s just the professor being incredibly kind-hearted. Maybe there’s some elite tier of athletes mentioned in the official handbook that I’m completely oblivious to, but I’ve never personally dealt with an athlete who had to schedule special exam times like that.

From what I recall, the student submits a formal request to Nvidia and it usually gets approved. Once that happens, it isn't just a matter of goodwill anymore. Also, if memory serves, Home Depot typically releases those confirmations around November or December. The whole process takes a while.

copperpuma11 said:From what I recall, the student submits a formal request to Nvidia and it usually gets approved. Once that happens, it isn't just a matter of goodwill anymore. Also, if memory serves, Home Depot typically releases those confirmations around November or December. The whole process takes a while.

Now, some schools might actually operate that way, but there’s no rule or requirement stating that the faculty board has to be the one making the final call on whether someone sticks to the agreement.

hiddendriver34 said:Now, some schools might actually operate that way, but there’s no rule or requirement stating that the faculty board has to be the one making the final call on whether someone sticks to the agreement.

Correction, I meant the grade-level council. It's actually backed by law. It specifically applies to categorized athletes under HOO guidelines. I agree it’s not strictly mandatory, but it is the established rule.

mellowskipper said:I was just scrolling through the e-government portal, looking over some of the new regulations. It seems like there's quite a bit of a stir regarding those extra credit points for second languages—specifically the idea of using them for admission into language academies.
It actually makes sense, I suppose, but then you have to wonder why they aren't applying that same logic to computer science or technical high schools. Or even Catholic religious education.
The suggestion to scrap the GPA-based system is a decent one, in theory—it’s a solid idea—but let's be honest, that's probably never going to happen.

Sent from my PRA-LX1 via Reddit

Just leave the religious education alone (there are plenty of Catholic schools already enough).

They actually scrapped points for a second foreign language about ten years ago, but interestingly, you could still take advanced Latin in classical academies if you had studied it in middle school. What's funny is nobody ever questioned whether all students actually have the chance to pick Latin in middle school. The usual argument was that not everyone has the opportunity to choose a second language, though based on the comments in the consultation, it seems some kids can pick three different languages as their "second" language!

As for computer science, I think the quality varies wildly from one school to the next (though that goes for foreign languages too), depending on who is teaching, who is enrolling, and whether they hand out easy A's just to keep the averages up. I know people whose kids skipped elective computer science because, after 5th grade, they realized the curriculum was way too slow for what they actually wanted to learn (those kids were more into algebra and stuff like that).
But it would be great if high schools offering an advanced computer science track, or vocational tech schools, had their own specific entrance exams for that subject. That would be a definite win.
That’s also why I think it’s so important that entrance exams aren't identical across the whole country. Schools should be allowed the autonomy to decide what they want to test and to design their own exams themselves. I see some pushback on this during the consultation, though—people are asking "what if a teacher knows the student personally and gives them easier questions?" 😂 Talk about having a lot of faith in teachers! 🥳

With the classics, they always dump you into both the beginner and the advanced tracks at once—but if you're actually getting credit for learning Latin, you have to be in the advanced class, so I guess that weird inequality kind of evens itself out in the end. ☕
The big issue is that only getting two credits for four years of a second language... honestly, that felt like a total violation of our constitutional rights. ☕

Sarah Hall53 said:With the classics, they always dump you into both the beginner and the advanced tracks at once—but if you're actually getting credit for learning Latin, you have to be in the advanced class, so I guess that weird inequality kind of evens itself out in the end. ☕
The big issue is that only getting two credits for four years of a second language... honestly, that felt like a total violation of our constitutional rights. ☕

That’s exactly my point—I honestly don't have anything against giving them extra points. I mean, look, we have German classes here, but we also have computer science scheduled during the opposite shift... so if they’re going to award points for language proficiency, I guess you might as well do the same for tech skills, right? Maybe.
Regarding religious studies—I suppose that’s likely a prerequisite if you're looking to enroll in Catholic high schools, though I assume it doesn't actually net you any extra credit points in the admissions process.
What is your professional take on the concept of general success? I mean, if you ask me—and I suppose I am qualified enough to offer a perspective here—it’s such a nebulous, poorly defined metric. Most people seem to chase this idea of a singular peak, but I find that definition lacks any real substance. Is it wealth? Influence? Or just staying afloat without losing your mind? I guess it depends on how you view the trajectory of a career, though I tend to think we overcomplicate the whole thing—perhaps too much, actually. It's a bit of a moving target, isn't it?

Sent from my iPhone using Reddit

From what I see in my professional circle, the general consensus is pretty much that this whole system only works for passing high school graduation—because honestly, right now, the goal is just hitting whatever score you need to get into college by any means necessary, regardless of whether you actually learned anything.
As an elective foreign language teacher, if you ask me, the focus on overall GPA and computer science (which kids take as an elective in middle school and then as a requirement in high school) is basically killing off interest in second languages.

Regarding those computer science credits, I’m with you, but we should probably only count one credit for 7th and 8th grade since it becomes mandatory later on. For a language, though, giving two extra points would only be fair if they’ve been studying it consistently for all four years from middle school through high school—it just wouldn't be right to give the same weight to someone who only took it as a two-year elective as someone who stuck with it for the full four.

Sarah Hall53 said:With the classics, they always dump you into both the beginner and the advanced tracks at once—but if you're actually getting credit for learning Latin, you have to be in the advanced class, so I guess that weird inequality kind of evens itself out in the end. ☕
The big issue is that only getting two credits for four years of a second language... honestly, that felt like a total violation of our constitutional rights. ☕

I know.
And if you want credit for a second language, you absolutely have to take the advanced version.
Honestly, teaching these languages in schools feels like a waste of time if students just take the beginner levels during middle school—or don't take them at all (which seems to be the case based on what many teachers are saying in the online feedback sessions).
Not to mention the situation where someone studies German or French for eight years because it was the choice made back in elementary school, only to take advanced English later. If they don't take the first language they studied, it’s basically just throwing money down the drain.
It's an open secret that (at least regarding German, from what I've heard) parents are often nudged toward it at the start of sixth grade, or it's just pushed on kids as a requirement for staying in certain programs. Over the years, the number of classes has actually shrunk because kids either give up or simply don't sign up for the language in high school.

Also, looking at the proposed regulations, it seems like the Department of Education forgot that English isn't everyone's first language (something they also seemed to forget over on YouTube a couple of years ago).
Susan James made a great point here:

Regarding foreign language testing, we should clarify it this way: "...English, Mathematics, and the foreign language that students will study as their primary foreign language in High School..."
Reasoning: A problem arises if we allow schools to test only the first foreign language students learned in Elementary School, rather than the one they intend to study as their primary foreign language in High School. In some cases, students won't be able to or won't want to continue with the language they started in Elementary School (like French), and instead, they'll choose the language they studied as their *second* foreign language in Elementary School to be their primary one in High School. Therefore, students should be given the choice of which language to test for during admissions—it makes much more sense to test the language they will actually be continuing, rather than strictly sticking to whatever was their first language in Elementary School.

Though, personally, I think it makes sense to test proficiency in both languages if they are being taken at the advanced level.
(Latin as well 😬)

Susan James said:I know.
And if you want credit for a second language, you absolutely have to take the advanced version.
Honestly, teaching these languages in schools feels like a waste of time if students just take the beginner levels during middle school—or don't take them at all (which seems to be the case based on what many teachers are saying in the online feedback sessions).
Not to mention the situation where someone studies German or French for eight years because it was the choice made back in elementary school, only to take advanced English later. If they don't take the first language they studied, it’s basically just throwing money down the drain.
It's an open secret that (at least regarding German, from what I've heard) parents are often nudged toward it at the start of sixth grade, or it's just pushed on kids as a requirement for staying in certain programs. Over the years, the number of classes has actually shrunk because kids either give up or simply don't sign up for the language in high school.

Also, looking at the proposed regulations, it seems like the Department of Education forgot that English isn't everyone's first language (something they also seemed to forget over on YouTube a couple of years ago).
Susan James made a great point here:

Regarding foreign language testing, we should clarify it this way: "...English, Mathematics, and the foreign language that students will study as their primary foreign language in High School..."
Reasoning: A problem arises if we allow schools to test only the first foreign language students learned in Elementary School, rather than the one they intend to study as their primary foreign language in High School. In some cases, students won't be able to or won't want to continue with the language they started in Elementary School (like French), and instead, they'll choose the language they studied as their *second* foreign language in Elementary School to be their primary one in High School. Therefore, students should be given the choice of which language to test for during admissions—it makes much more sense to test the language they will actually be continuing, rather than strictly sticking to whatever was their first language in Elementary School.

Though, personally, I think it makes sense to test proficiency in both languages if they are being taken at the advanced level.
(Latin as well 😬)

I mean, honestly, when is it actually better to start learning German, given how much inflection you have to deal with? There is a massive, night-and-day difference in skill levels between someone who has studied it for five years versus eight. With the way that language works, you pretty much need those seven or eight years just to start putting sentences together on your own if you're going at a standard school pace.—it’s just built into the nature of the language.
The gap between five and eight years of studying English is more like subtle nuances—my senior advisor tells me that when she looks at eighth graders, she can barely tell from their textbooks whether they've been learning it for five years or eight. But with German? Man, the difference is incredibly obvious.
And it really tells you everything you need to know that kids can pick up English as their primary second language without any trouble after just five years. Just try imagining doing that with German or French—you'd be looking at guaranteed remedial classes.

As for why they aren't signing up for the second language, blame the inflated GPA requirements and the fact that mandatory computer science classes have completely crowded out the regular curriculum ☕ and there you go—blaming the people who don't want to deal with bureaucracy just to appease parents who actually know what's best for their kids.

I honestly feel like there’s some serious bias creeping in here. Now they’re pushing for an extra two points just because it fits their specific narrative—claiming "it would be fair." But let me tell you, it wouldn't be fair at all. Not even a little bit.
The only way to make this truly equitable is through standardized testing—one uniform exam for everyone. We should have three mandatory subjects, much like the SATs or those college entrance exams, with the rest being purely elective based on student interest. And of course, meeting the prerequisite for advanced placement in things like computer science or a foreign language shouldn't depend on whether someone happened to sit in a specific classroom during high school; it should be about actual proficiency and desire. It’s the same logic we use elsewhere—just as elementary school language classes aren't a guarantee for high school placement, it should all come down to skill level. If we’re aiming for a true meritocracy, decisions should be based strictly on knowledge and nothing else.

Back in the day, when we had second languages or computer science scheduled during different periods in fifth and sixth grade, having those mandatory courses didn't create any imbalance. In fact, if anything, some students actually stuck with their German studies for another two years precisely because they weren't stuck dealing with those heavy two-period blocks in an opposing schedule; they only had one session a week instead.

Sarah Hall53 said:I mean, honestly, when is it actually better to start learning German, given how much inflection you have to deal with? There is a massive, night-and-day difference in skill levels between someone who has studied it for five years versus eight. With the way that language works, you pretty much need those seven or eight years just to start putting sentences together on your own if you're going at a standard school pace.—it’s just built into the nature of the language.
The gap between five and eight years of studying English is more like subtle nuances—my senior advisor tells me that when she looks at eighth graders, she can barely tell from their textbooks whether they've been learning it for five years or eight. But with German? Man, the difference is incredibly obvious.
And it really tells you everything you need to know that kids can pick up English as their primary second language without any trouble after just five years. Just try imagining doing that with German or French—you'd be looking at guaranteed remedial classes.

As for why they aren't signing up for the second language, blame the inflated GPA requirements and the fact that mandatory computer science classes have completely crowded out the regular curriculum ☕ and there you go—blaming the people who don't want to deal with bureaucracy just to appease parents who actually know what's best for their kids.

Not every kid (and let's face it, maybe not all will ever) is naturally wired for foreign languages. If you follow the flood of IPov reports regarding struggles with reading and writing, then the absolute minimum these students need is to start German in first grade. And honestly, the teachers need it too.

I agree that sending a teacher to the principal's office or cutting their pay isn't the answer—especially when, say, 14 students out of an entire grade don't want to take German as a second language (or when the school won't even schedule a class if only 11 show up, which happens all the time with elective courses like Religion). But the solution isn't forcing that language on 26 students for eight years when maybe only one of them actually cares, especially when it's being disguised as an "after-school program."
And that's exactly what's happening. It's becoming more common.
I see how hard it is for kids who have zero interest and no one at home to help them, especially when they might be dealing with other challenges too.
That is a guaranteed recipe for making them hate the language.
And I don't think the fix is to just hand out passing grades from fifth to eighth grade as a "thank you" for showing up for three hours a week while they learn nothing.

I am definitely in favor of offering extra credit for a second language and giving priority enrollment to schools that offer two advanced language tracks.

Generally speaking, I think ALL extra credit points (aside from actual grades and entrance exams) should be awarded for the specialized programs schools offer. We should give an advantage to the kids who want to go the extra mile by rewarding participation in activities the school deems relevant.

For kids who struggle with reading and writing, every second language feels like a massive mountain to climb. Honestly, even German—with all its strict rules for how you actually say things—seems way more straightforward than English, which is basically just a chaotic circle of spelling hell.