High School Guide: Admissions, reviews, and advice

Since a certain percentage of students fail their high school exit exams every single year, it feels like passing isn't actually a requirement for everyone to move forward.

Edit:

So, looking at the numbers, about 19% of students fail at least one mandatory exam. That’s honestly a pretty significant chunk of the class.

Carl Bishop2 said:Since a certain percentage of students fail their high school exit exams every single year, it feels like passing isn't actually a requirement for everyone to move forward.

Edit:

So, looking at the numbers, about 19% of students fail at least one mandatory exam. That’s honestly a pretty significant chunk of the class.

Yeah, I see what you mean. About 32% of vocational students and 3.2% of college-prep students failed. Given all those little hiccups—like someone signing their full legal name when they shouldn't, showing up late to the testing center, or just bubbling in the wrong answers on the Scantron—I’d argue the goal is really for 100% of the college-track kids to pass. Vocational students have their certifications anyway, so they don't necessarily need the exit exam to move forward.

If the issue is just that the requirements are too easy to breeze through, then universities really need to raise the bar.
Is it actually possible for a college to require an 80% or 90% pass rate in a specific subject?
How much leeway do they actually have when it comes to setting their own enrollment rules?

rowdypanther12 said:If the issue is just that the requirements are too easy to breeze through, then universities really need to raise the bar.
Is it actually possible for a college to require an 80% or 90% pass rate in a specific subject?
How much leeway do they actually have when it comes to setting their own enrollment rules?

Well, they should try it—those Ivy League schools that everyone is practically begging to get into.
Physics and math departments probably have to pay them just to take their students.

I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁

hiddendriver34 said:I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁

I don't think he's really into math at all, so I doubt he'll end up enrolling in any more math-related courses down the road.
There’s this one guy I know who absolutely lives for math; he wants to make a career out of it, and honestly, the problems on the SAT are a total breeze for him.
It’s just like those old assignments we used to tackle back at Ferrero.
It’s exactly like those students who choose to major in Project Management on their own terms—not because their parents are forcing some unrealistic dream onto them.

Who’s the resident math whiz here? This person has already crushed everything from school competitions to regional ones—maybe even national level. For them, taking the entrance exam is basically just a way to give their brain a little workout and feed their soul. I remember some folks last year who treated those entrance exams like a casual sightseeing tour; they breezed through the whole thing without breaking a sweat. If they felt any pressure, it was probably just because of the heat! Honestly, they should have scheduled those tests for 9:00 PM just to keep things cool.

It’s honestly a bit disheartening to see students graduating high school when they can't even manage to pass more than half of their coursework. It feels like we're sending kids out into the world without the basic tools they need to succeed.
We’re diving into the conversation about which group of young adults is most likely to be heavily medicated, and honestly, it says a lot about the state of our education system. It really highlights how much pressure students are under and how they're actually engaging with the learning process these days.

hiddendriver34 said:I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁

I think I’ve already touched on this in another thread—if that makes sense. In my view, someone with those scores definitely isn't cut out for intense fields like pure mathematics, physics, or even engineering at a place like MIT. But—and this is just a thought—couldn't they potentially pursue something where the math load is mostly front-loaded in the first year, like pharmacy or veterinary medicine?
Though, obviously, you’d still need to hit the required advanced math standards for admission.
You'd probably exhaust yourself during the prep work, pass that meager 25%, and then you're stuck facing that one daunting math exam at university.

mellowskipper said:I think I’ve already touched on this in another thread—if that makes sense. In my view, someone with those scores definitely isn't cut out for intense fields like pure mathematics, physics, or even engineering at a place like MIT. But—and this is just a thought—couldn't they potentially pursue something where the math load is mostly front-loaded in the first year, like pharmacy or veterinary medicine?
Though, obviously, you’d still need to hit the required advanced math standards for admission.
You'd probably exhaust yourself during the prep work, pass that meager 25%, and then you're stuck facing that one daunting math exam at university.

Personally, I feel that if they’ve gone and split things into Level A and Level B (though, honestly, I think splitting them like that insults students' intelligence and just lowers the overall quality of our education system), then everyone attending a STEM-focused high school should be required to take the Level A exam. For those in general or liberal arts tracks—who might have fewer math hours but are still following a standard high school curriculum—they should at least need a 70% passing grade on the Level B exam to actually receive their diploma. The whole situation is just a total circus right now.

Susan James said:Personally, I feel that if they’ve gone and split things into Level A and Level B (though, honestly, I think splitting them like that insults students' intelligence and just lowers the overall quality of our education system), then everyone attending a STEM-focused high school should be required to take the Level A exam. For those in general or liberal arts tracks—who might have fewer math hours but are still following a standard high school curriculum—they should at least need a 70% passing grade on the Level B exam to actually receive their diploma. The whole situation is just a total circus right now.

I honestly don't see the point of these different tiers. Just have one standard and be done with it.
Anyone who actually needs a "higher" level is headed for college anyway, and let's face it—they'll be pulling all-nighters and bleeding for their grades there regardless.
The reality check happens pretty quickly during freshman year.

hiddendriver34 said:I'm wondering if someone can actually enroll in math courses if they only managed to scrape by with a 25% on their high school math final. 😁

In Washington, D.C., you can't pass even the teaching roles or the non-teaching ones—the cutoff is 55%. Then in Indianapolis, you aren't allowed to teach math (where the threshold is 40%), though I suppose if someone actually manages to squeeze in, they could potentially handle both math and computer science.

Here. I guess you should probably go ahead and input mathematics first. Once you do that, you'll be able to see all the different study programs available and check out the specific admission requirements for each one.

When it comes to math and high school graduation exams, honestly, it doesn't matter much who scored what on their final tests. If they don't actually grasp the material, they won't be able to pass a single college course anyway. That means the chances of us ending up with a "mathematician" who doesn't actually understand math are practically zero.

The real issue is that none of the economics programs here in the US require advanced calculus, nor do they set any real threshold for standard algebra. We should really be asking ourselves what kind of economists are graduating from these institutions instead... that's what costs our economy so much more than those few students who struggle with math (though, let’s be real, who would choose to major in math if they weren't naturally good at it? It's one of the least popular subjects and majors in the country, right up there with physics and stuff like 😁).

Michelle Nelson4 said:When it comes to math and high school graduation exams, honestly, it doesn't matter much who scored what on their final tests. If they don't actually grasp the material, they won't be able to pass a single college course anyway. That means the chances of us ending up with a "mathematician" who doesn't actually understand math are practically zero.

The real issue is that none of the economics programs here in the US require advanced calculus, nor do they set any real threshold for standard algebra. We should really be asking ourselves what kind of economists are graduating from these institutions instead... that's what costs our economy so much more than those few students who struggle with math (though, let’s be real, who would choose to major in math if they weren't naturally good at it? It's one of the least popular subjects and majors in the country, right up there with physics and stuff like 😁).

I couldn't agree more.

There are plenty of students who have a real knack for math but just aren't interested in the whole competition circuit. They haven't won any trophies, yet they turn out to be perfectly capable students at places like MIT or Caltech.

There’s a massive middle ground between "crushing advanced Olympiad problems" and "struggling to scrape by on the AP Calculus exam." To succeed at those top-tier universities, you don't necessarily need to be some kind of once-in-a-generation genius. What really matters is having a solid foundation, decent logical reasoning, and—most importantly—not having that mental block where you tell yourself, "I can't do this" or "this is too hard." Everything else can be learned with enough practice. Honestly, all this talk about needing pure geniuses or competition winners just builds up an unnecessary aura of intimidation around these schools...

mellowskipper said:I think I’ve already touched on this in another thread—if that makes sense. In my view, someone with those scores definitely isn't cut out for intense fields like pure mathematics, physics, or even engineering at a place like MIT. But—and this is just a thought—couldn't they potentially pursue something where the math load is mostly front-loaded in the first year, like pharmacy or veterinary medicine?
Though, obviously, you’d still need to hit the required advanced math standards for admission.
You'd probably exhaust yourself during the prep work, pass that meager 25%, and then you're stuck facing that one daunting math exam at university.

It’s honestly a joke because nothing you learn in those math classes actually helps you with any of your later exams.

Back when I first brought this up, everyone was like—"Oh, but you're an engineering major!" 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄 🙄🙄🙄

Michelle Nelson4 said:When it comes to math and high school graduation exams, honestly, it doesn't matter much who scored what on their final tests. If they don't actually grasp the material, they won't be able to pass a single college course anyway. That means the chances of us ending up with a "mathematician" who doesn't actually understand math are practically zero.

The real issue is that none of the economics programs here in the US require advanced calculus, nor do they set any real threshold for standard algebra. We should really be asking ourselves what kind of economists are graduating from these institutions instead... that's what costs our economy so much more than those few students who struggle with math (though, let’s be real, who would choose to major in math if they weren't naturally good at it? It's one of the least popular subjects and majors in the country, right up there with physics and stuff like 😁).

Signature

rowdypanther12 said:I’ve always been all for learning languages—the more, the better—but honestly, you don't necessarily need anything beyond English since almost every major global corporation uses it as their official language.
That said, I find it perfectly natural to start picking up bits and pieces of the local language after spending a few months in a new country. I get that it isn't strictly required, but I don't quite understand why people don't take advantage of those opportunities to learn.

With Google Translate nowadays, you don't even really need to know English, and you don't even need to be literate in your own language since there's a spellchecker for everything.
With AI chatbots on the rise, we might not even need doctors anytime soon.

Learning a language for some imaginary job ten or twenty years down the line feels completely pointless. It’s even more ridiculous to learn a language just so you can order a coffee or buy bread in a foreign country.
(Though I could go on about kids who study for five years and still can't manage to order fries at a McDonald's in Vienna, instead waiting for someone to speak to them in their native tongue. To me, that just feels a bit provincial, but hey, to each their own.)

Most people, once they've settled in for a month or two (if they have the drive, of course), have already picked up some basics. I personally know people who hit a solid B or even C level in the local language within six months. Motivation is the absolute key to learning; forcing it on anyone is just useless.

On the other hand, the way we teach in our schools—way too slow during those sponge-like years when kids soak everything up, and then far too focused on grades when they're overwhelmed by much more important exams—makes it feel like language classes exist just to keep teachers employed and to help us meet EK requirements for bilingual programs. But if we're going to have it in the curriculum and preach its importance, then damn it, we should give priority (in terms of admissions points) to students who are actually pursuing languages. Maybe they missed out on a point or two because they struggled with Biology in seventh grade, or lost a decimal point in elementary school because they didn't take certain electives.
If we really want languages in our system, high schools should give preference to language specialists (though I’d probably revamp how we certify them myself).
A credit for five years of German (which they'll continue in that specific high school) is worth more than a credit for winning a state table tennis championship. Plus, it secures a job for the German teacher and likely keeps them motivated, since they'll actually have students who *want* to learn the language (unless it's just the parents pushing it).
Forcing kids into a beginner language track that they'll have to stick with for four years, just so someone can maintain a permanent contract, while the kid actually wants to go to a different high school because of the schedule or location, is just senseless.

I’m not entirely sure if Google actually has the capacity to simultaneously translate you and everyone else you're talking to, especially when some people have such incredibly interesting accents 😁

Michelle Nelson4 said:I’m not entirely sure if Google actually has the capacity to simultaneously translate you and everyone else you're talking to, especially when some people have such incredibly interesting accents 😁

By the time today's eighth graders graduate high school, they'll have 🤣
so it’s probably best if they don't bother taking foreign languages in school at all 😬 🙂

Yeah, absolutely.

🤣
Taking a little poetic license here 😬

Anyway, who really cares about the art? At the end of the day, it's the stem that matters—that's what puts food on the table!