High School Guide: Admissions, reviews, and advice

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

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

Case in point: my teenager, who basically lives in bed until 11:00 whenever he gets the chance, specifically chose a high school with morning classes just so he could stick to that schedule.

His logic?
- If school is in the morning, I have way more free time during the day.
- Just as I finally get used to the early mornings, the afternoon shift comes along and messes up my whole flow.

As for me, even at my age, I much prefer the afternoon shift. My internal clock is basically set to "teenage mode"—I am absolutely useless in the morning, but I hit my stride in the evening. Honestly, I'll probably be this way forever (I see it in my mom, too). When I have a long, relaxing vacation, I'm sleeping in until 11:00 without a second thought.

Quick question for those who enrolled their kids in freshman year of high school over the last couple of cycles—are you happy with the choice? More importantly, are the kids actually satisfied?

Did they manage to land their first-choice school on the list?

Was there any major disappointment if they didn't get in?

Katy Perry and mine are the same way; she's such a sleeper, but if she has any say in it, she’ll definitely pick the morning shift

Betty Wood54 said:Comparing a liberal arts science program to medical school isn't really an apples-to-apples comparison in terms of "how hard the physics or chemistry is," but I suppose that’s beside the point. The real issue here is just the sheer volume of applicants. At the medical school in Washington, D.C., the pressure is intense because you have so many top-tier students—people with incredible grades and actual knowledge—all vying for the same spots. It turns out their high school diplomas just weren't enough to act as a filter for such a competitive pool, so they had to implement entrance exams to sort through everyone.

just because there wasn't supposedly enough organic chem on the SATs

hiddendriver34 said:Case in point: my teenager, who basically lives in bed until 11:00 whenever he gets the chance, specifically chose a high school with morning classes just so he could stick to that schedule.

His logic?
- If school is in the morning, I have way more free time during the day.
- Just as I finally get used to the early mornings, the afternoon shift comes along and messes up my whole flow.

As for me, even at my age, I much prefer the afternoon shift. My internal clock is basically set to "teenage mode"—I am absolutely useless in the morning, but I hit my stride in the evening. Honestly, I'll probably be this way forever (I see it in my mom, too). When I have a long, relaxing vacation, I'm sleeping in until 11:00 without a second thought.

Both you and I are total night owls😉

Betty Wood54 said:I find it somewhat funny that you are asking about the Hesse normal form. Honestly, that specific term isn't really used in the States at all—I mean, when I searched online, I could barely find anything besides one obscure lecture note mentioning the Hesse normal form for line equations. It seems just a little too niche, so I guess I don't quite understand why anyone would remember it using that exact phrasing.

But really, who is supposed to remember what, exactly?
The Hessian normal form is just standard material covered back in 11th or 12th grade high school... I just assumed it was part of the curriculum here too, so I didn't bother looking it up because I simply took it for granted.
Besides, how does any of this even relate to the point I was making about my enrollment?
There was mention of how some schools don't even get around to covering integrals, so I just figured if they're skipping those, there's probably a whole laundry list of other things left untouched or unmastered in the classroom.
And what does that have to do with anything you're saying?
You could swap out "Hessian normal form" for pretty much any other topic taught in an American high school and the logic remains identical: if vocational schools clearly aren't covering certain topics—which seems obvious based on various forum posts regarding enrollment—then there is undoubtedly more missing, which ultimately leads to poor preparation for college.
I certainly can't be expected to know the entire contents of every single high school curriculum in advance, regardless of the subject.

Betty Wood54 said:Medical school doesn't need to pretend to be elite; it's inherently elite. In my view, it doesn't really fall into the same category as most other majors. You are training to actually heal people, and that requires a specific kind of dedication.

So, I don't mind if they "act elite" by having entrance exams. They are looking for people who truly want to pursue medicine. And honestly, there are so many applicants that high school graduation scores alone aren't enough to properly screen them. The medical entrance exams are significantly tougher than the equivalent subjects on a standard diploma, so they can perform a much better selection process.

I haven't seen any posts from capttawish yet! I'll be sure to keep an eye out for them. kaže:
The real issue here is just the sheer volume of applicants. Take medical school in Washington, D.C., for example—the competition there is absolutely intense because you have so many incredibly bright students, both in terms of their grades and their actual subject knowledge, all vying for those limited spots. It got to the point where high school diplomas alone weren't enough to filter through such a talented pool of candidates, so they eventually had to introduce entrance exams to handle the selection process.

So, it looks like I was wrong about the high school diploma being the deciding factor for identifying who actually has the necessary background versus who’s starting from scratch. It seems the real issue isn't about assessing prior knowledge anymore, but rather the sheer amount of pressure surrounding enrollment numbers.

They could absolutely use the SAT scores to handle the selection process. I’ve honestly never heard of a university facing such a massive surge in applicants that they couldn't simply establish a ranking system or set specific criteria to draw a line and only enroll those who meet the threshold. Even departments facing even higher demand than the Treasury Department have managed to pull it off. But then again, maybe there just isn't enough revenue coming in from application fees to make that happen. I just really hope the government doesn't end up footing the bill for all those empty seats left by students who didn't enroll this year, only to end up stuck in a massive budget deficit because of it. ☕

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

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

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

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

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

It’s funny how things work, isn't it? Suddenly everyone is all about having clear instructions and proper preparation. It feels like a complete 180 from just a few days ago when every other post was nothing but endless complaining about what they have and how much the kids are being disadvantaged because their parents can't afford everything. Now, out of nowhere, it's all about being organized! 🤣

Regarding the standardized testing situation, I’d honestly put my money on this: I would much rather allow students to use outside resources or even cheat during their final exams if it meant protecting the school's reputation. If those test scores come back looking terrible because of overly strict rules, it could really damage the prestige and ranking of an elite private academy. It feels like a choice between academic integrity and maintaining the high status of the institution, doesn't it?I’m not saying that's how it should be done.)I really feel like someone at the university needs to address the issue of entrance exam leaks. If someone is handing out test questions, they’re going to have to deal with that student for the next five years, knowing full well they took a spot away from someone who might actually have more potential.

....

Google
That’s pretty much all I have to say about that.

Who is actually drafting the SAT prep materials and the exam questions? Who gets a sneak peek at the questions beforehand? And when it comes to grading, is it the high school teachers overseeing the process or an outside group?
And regarding the college entrance exams—who writes them, who knows the answers ahead of time, and ultimately, who verifies the final scores at the Treasury Department? Is it an independent committee or just the staff within the Treasury Department itself?

It feels like you're writing this without even grasping the basic principles of external validation for results. It’s hard to take these kinds of ramblings seriously, especially when they're dressed up with dramatic phrases like "I'd stake my life on the fact that..." 🤣

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

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

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

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

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

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

Susan James said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I know people at med school end up repeating their whole freshman year just because they couldn't hack physics or chemistry. Honestly, those two are easily the hardest classes in the first year—not even because the material is impossible, but mostly because the professors are total nightmares.

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

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

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

Can't colleges just set their own admission requirements? Like, deciding how much weight to give high school exams or what GPA you need to hit... I guess they should have more say in that.

stormymarlin22 said:Can't colleges just set their own admission requirements? Like, deciding how much weight to give high school exams or what GPA you need to hit... I guess they should have more say in that.

I suppose they can, I guess every degree program has that kind of autonomy.

Terry Martinez10 said:But really, who is supposed to remember what, exactly?
The Hessian normal form is just standard material covered back in 11th or 12th grade high school... I just assumed it was part of the curriculum here too, so I didn't bother looking it up because I simply took it for granted.
Besides, how does any of this even relate to the point I was making about my enrollment?
There was mention of how some schools don't even get around to covering integrals, so I just figured if they're skipping those, there's probably a whole laundry list of other things left untouched or unmastered in the classroom.
And what does that have to do with anything you're saying?
You could swap out "Hessian normal form" for pretty much any other topic taught in an American high school and the logic remains identical: if vocational schools clearly aren't covering certain topics—which seems obvious based on various forum posts regarding enrollment—then there is undoubtedly more missing, which ultimately leads to poor preparation for college.
I certainly can't be expected to know the entire contents of every single high school curriculum in advance, regardless of the subject.

Limits, derivatives, and integrals are the very last things covered in the senior year of high school (for any track with four years of math). Integrals are literally the final unit in the curriculum; if those aren't covered, it doesn't necessarily mean nothing else was missed later on.

Why all that isn't finished, I honestly haven't a clue. I went to a specialized math prep school, so we had extra hours and we got through all of it. But kids in general education tracks have fewer hours, so maybe teachers just focus on other things and end up skipping the rest.

But, speaking as someone with quite a bit of experience with university-level math, whether those specific topics were covered in high school isn't actually that critical for college math. At almost any university, if you're studying integrals (at least nowadays), you basically start from scratch and learn them from the ground up.

And that isn't because of "poor high school preparation." It's more because university mathematics (for the 90% of people who weren't math competition kids) represents a shift toward a completely different way of thinking, specifically regarding proofs. That's where most people struggle. The problems are harder, they require more work, and they demand a deeper level of understanding—you really have to grasp the definitions and the proofs themselves.

And that's not just an issue in the former America; it's everywhere. In the US, you have the famous Calculus, which covers the basics of derivatives and integrals, mostly at a computational level (we even did some integral definitions via limits back in high school). Then you have Mathematical Analysis, which is the true mathematical approach to it. In our universities, we jump straight into Mathematical Analysis.

Personally, I think your approach of using "random topic X" is just silly. First off, when I looked up what that was, I couldn't see any connection to college prep. Something you can read a definition for in ten seconds and immediately understand shouldn't be considered a major pillar of college readiness.

Michelle Nelson4 said:

I haven't seen any posts from capttawish yet! I'll be sure to keep an eye out for them. kaže:
The real issue here is just the sheer volume of applicants. Take medical school in Washington, D.C., for example—the competition there is absolutely intense because you have so many incredibly bright students, both in terms of their grades and their actual subject knowledge, all vying for those limited spots. It got to the point where high school diplomas alone weren't enough to filter through such a talented pool of candidates, so they eventually had to introduce entrance exams to handle the selection process.

So, it looks like I was wrong about the high school diploma being the deciding factor for identifying who actually has the necessary background versus who’s starting from scratch. It seems the real issue isn't about assessing prior knowledge anymore, but rather the sheer amount of pressure surrounding enrollment numbers.

They could absolutely use the SAT scores to handle the selection process. I’ve honestly never heard of a university facing such a massive surge in applicants that they couldn't simply establish a ranking system or set specific criteria to draw a line and only enroll those who meet the threshold. Even departments facing even higher demand than the Treasury Department have managed to pull it off. But then again, maybe there just isn't enough revenue coming in from application fees to make that happen. I just really hope the government doesn't end up footing the bill for all those empty seats left by students who didn't enroll this year, only to end up stuck in a massive budget deficit because of it. ☕

It’s funny how things work, isn't it? Suddenly everyone is all about having clear instructions and proper preparation. It feels like a complete 180 from just a few days ago when every other post was nothing but endless complaining about what they have and how much the kids are being disadvantaged because their parents can't afford everything. Now, out of nowhere, it's all about being organized! 🤣

Regarding the standardized testing situation, I’d honestly put my money on this: I would much rather allow students to use outside resources or even cheat during their final exams if it meant protecting the school's reputation. If those test scores come back looking terrible because of overly strict rules, it could really damage the prestige and ranking of an elite private academy. It feels like a choice between academic integrity and maintaining the high status of the institution, doesn't it?I’m not saying that's how it should be done.)I really feel like someone at the university needs to address the issue of entrance exam leaks. If someone is handing out test questions, they’re going to have to deal with that student for the next five years, knowing full well they took a spot away from someone who might actually have more potential.

....

Google
That’s pretty much all I have to say about that.

Who is actually drafting the SAT prep materials and the exam questions? Who gets a sneak peek at the questions beforehand? And when it comes to grading, is it the high school teachers overseeing the process or an outside group?
And regarding the college entrance exams—who writes them, who knows the answers ahead of time, and ultimately, who verifies the final scores at the Treasury Department? Is it an independent committee or just the staff within the Treasury Department itself?

It feels like you're writing this without even grasping the basic principles of external validation for results. It’s hard to take these kinds of ramblings seriously, especially when they're dressed up with dramatic phrases like "I'd stake my life on the fact that..." 🤣

I am about 99% sure they won't pay out for those. I guess when a student enrolls at a university, either the government subsidizes their tuition—meaning the school gets paid based on the specific program agreements set between the SEC and the universities—or the student pays out of pocket because they don't meet certain criteria, like being in a second degree program or falling below 30 credits, etc. So, those schools aren't getting that money. I suppose it's hard to say how much that actually matters to them, though I suspect every single cent counts for these institutions, tbh.

Maybe looking at MIT, they used to have that requirement where the combined math and physics score had to be a 7, and they just couldn't fill the quota. Then they eventually scrapped that rule. It seems to me that the funding from those 100 unfilled spots is more important to them than keeping the old rules (and it’s not just a one-year thing anyway; some people will drop out, others will re-enroll and pay full tuition, and some will stay on track so the government keeps paying for them).

EDIT: Of course, they probably won't go into a financial deficit just because of this; it isn't the only way they receive federal funds. All the adjunct and TA positions that aren't covered by specific research grants are paid for directly through the SEC budget.

My take is that they’re intentionally making things unnecessarily difficult—acting like a high school diploma isn't enough for some while it's perfectly fine for everyone else. I don't see any actual benefit here for the students or even the country; it feels more like this is being driven by someone's specific interests. Honestly, even a small financial hit could serve as a decent disciplinary measure—in the US, we actually have the option to impose financial repercussions to finally put an end to these kinds of shenanigans.

All this talk about needing a 25% passing grade in chemistry, leaving the poor Treasury unable to select candidates, is just nonsense. If you earned a top grade on your high school chemistry finals, you didn't just scrape by with 25%; you likely mastered at least 85% of the material. It really makes you wonder, though: are these entrance exams strictly testing the standard high school chemistry curriculum, or is there extra stuff thrown in? And if there is "extra" material, where on earth are students supposed to learn it? Private schools? Tutors? Just teaching themselves?

We just wrapped up integrals—back in our AP Calculus class—literally like the week before last. We didn't even get to a formal exam because we ran out of time; she just went over the fundamentals. Honestly, nobody had a clue what was going on.
Before that, we were grinding through derivatives—we spent quite a bit of time hammering away at those.

Michelle Nelson4 said:My take is that they’re intentionally making things unnecessarily difficult—acting like a high school diploma isn't enough for some while it's perfectly fine for everyone else. I don't see any actual benefit here for the students or even the country; it feels more like this is being driven by someone's specific interests. Honestly, even a small financial hit could serve as a decent disciplinary measure—in the US, we actually have the option to impose financial repercussions to finally put an end to these kinds of shenanigans.

All this talk about needing a 25% passing grade in chemistry, leaving the poor Treasury unable to select candidates, is just nonsense. If you earned a top grade on your high school chemistry finals, you didn't just scrape by with 25%; you likely mastered at least 85% of the material. It really makes you wonder, though: are these entrance exams strictly testing the standard high school chemistry curriculum, or is there extra stuff thrown in? And if there is "extra" material, where on earth are students supposed to learn it? Private schools? Tutors? Just teaching themselves?

I don't think there's much of a question there, honestly; the Treasury releases an official syllabus every single year detailing exactly what's on the exam, and it’s always just the standard high school material.

If the biology finals focus mostly on plants and animals while the Treasury ignores that stuff entirely because it isn't relevant to the major—focusing instead on human physiology—then I guess it's pretty obvious why the high school finals fail to filter candidates properly. Plus, back in the day, the difficulty gap between high school finals and these entrance exams was basically like comparing kindergarten to college.

Betty Wood54 said:Limits, derivatives, and integrals are the very last things covered in the senior year of high school (for any track with four years of math). Integrals are literally the final unit in the curriculum; if those aren't covered, it doesn't necessarily mean nothing else was missed later on.

Why all that isn't finished, I honestly haven't a clue. I went to a specialized math prep school, so we had extra hours and we got through all of it. But kids in general education tracks have fewer hours, so maybe teachers just focus on other things and end up skipping the rest.

But, speaking as someone with quite a bit of experience with university-level math, whether those specific topics were covered in high school isn't actually that critical for college math. At almost any university, if you're studying integrals (at least nowadays), you basically start from scratch and learn them from the ground up.

And that isn't because of "poor high school preparation." It's more because university mathematics (for the 90% of people who weren't math competition kids) represents a shift toward a completely different way of thinking, specifically regarding proofs. That's where most people struggle. The problems are harder, they require more work, and they demand a deeper level of understanding—you really have to grasp the definitions and the proofs themselves.

And that's not just an issue in the former America; it's everywhere. In the US, you have the famous Calculus, which covers the basics of derivatives and integrals, mostly at a computational level (we even did some integral definitions via limits back in high school). Then you have Mathematical Analysis, which is the true mathematical approach to it. In our universities, we jump straight into Mathematical Analysis.

Personally, I think your approach of using "random topic X" is just silly. First off, when I looked up what that was, I couldn't see any connection to college prep. Something you can read a definition for in ten seconds and immediately understand shouldn't be considered a major pillar of college readiness.

Nobody is actually out here studying "random topic X," but hey, if that's how you want to play it...

@Terry Martinez10

You’ve got the official curriculum and everything they say you should cover. Then there’s actual life, and all the reasons why some things don't get done—or if they do, how much quality actually goes into them. If a teacher gets stuck with a high-energy class where they have to spend half their time just managing discipline, that eats up all the teaching time. Now, imagine pairing a class like that with a relatively new, inexperienced teacher. Or consider when you have several different teachers for the same subject throughout high school, each with their own style of lecturing, grading, and classroom management. Off the top of my head, I can list how many different teachers we had over our four years at Phillips Academy. Math—3, physics—3, chemistry—2, history—4, Latin—2, English—3. Okay, maybe that's an extreme example, but that was just how it worked out for our generation. And those are just the permanent staff, not counting the subs who filled in for a week or two while someone was on sick leave. Combine that with a class that was 90% guys going through puberty, and honestly, it's a miracle the teachers managed anything with us at all (in the end, more than half the class ended up at MIT, and the rest went into other STEM programs). Then there's the other side: teachers who are just bad, or maybe they've just checked out. They do just enough to meet the requirements. For instance, we had a terrible teacher for logic, sociology, and philosophy. He was a great guy, but a lousy teacher—he spent more time joking around and telling tall tales than actually teaching. We also had one who was okay, but since we were his last group before retirement, you could tell he just didn't have the drive anymore and was just waiting for his pension (though, I know someone who had him 25 years ago and said he was actually great). Then there was our computer science teacher; she was incredibly knowledgeable but a terrible educator. She would insult students and clearly had her favorites, but by the time we graduated, she had crammed so much info into us that even with a mediocre grade, I had enough knowledge to land a job as a programmer. So, you see? It's really a combination of factors from both sides—student and teacher—that determines what kind of knowledge you actually walk away with after graduation.