High School Guide: Admissions, reviews, and advice

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, if you literally have to kill yourself just to hit the GPA needed for enrollment—whether that's a 3.2, a 3.5, or a perfect 4.0—then honestly, you probably aren't a good fit for that track to begin with.
Does that make sense?

Plus, nobody is stopping New Yorkers from just applying to a high school in a different city where the GPA requirements are lower—since everyone seems so incredibly bitter about the cities where you need a perfect 4.0 just to get in. ☕

And thirdly, I still haven't had anyone explain to me how high school admissions are somehow responsible for all the hysteria regarding GPAs and those "honor roll" certificates people obsess over during the first four years of middle school.

No,🤷 how can 4.5 and 5.0 be treated the same way?

I agree with Jason Morgan; there’s a huge difference between a kid struggling to get an A in core subjects and a requirement where you need a perfect 5.0 just to get into a decent high school.🤷
That ridiculous idea that if you don't have a 5.0, you don't belong in prep school, is just defending a broken system.
No, it isn't normal for kids to have a 5.0 without actually studying.
If they have a 5.0 without working for it, they should either be geniuses or their teachers are just handing out grades.
Because you can't be EXCELLENT at every single subject without putting in the effort.

I honestly couldn't care less how they handle admissions in Columbus; I'm just glad if their system hasn't collapsed yet and normal kids can get into prep schools with a 4.5 without getting unearned grades in middle school.
In Washington, D.C., the system is broken; if a kid goes to a school where grades are handed out, they're being cheated out of an education.
But if they go to a school where grades are earned fairly, they're shut out of most prep school admissions.

Carl Bishop2 said:I mean, look—it’s not necessarily "wrong," but it definitely feels off when everyone is supposed to be at a level 5, yet some people are coasting at a 5 while others are barely hitting a 3. It’s just an inconsistent setup, you know?

I suppose I should probably start by apologizing for my lack of brevity; I tend to wander off on tangents when I get thinking, much to the chagrin of those who prefer their information served in neat little bite-sized pieces. But I digress. Regarding the matter at hand—which, if I recall correctly, was sparked by some rather spirited debate earlier—it seems we have reached a bit of an impasse. It’s quite fascinating, really, how quickly a conversation can pivot from a simple observation to a full-blown philosophical disagreement. One moment you're discussing the weather in Columbus, and the next, you're questioning the very foundations of modern social etiquette. Anyway, I’ve been reflecting on what rowdypanther12 mentioned previously. While I don't entirely agree with the underlying premise—and there is quite a bit to disagree with, if I'm being perfectly honest—there is a certain logic to it that deserves acknowledgment. It’s like watching a slow-moving storm roll in over the coast; you know it's coming, you know it'll be messy, but you can't help but watch the way the clouds gather. I’ll attempt to be more concise in my following remarks, though I make no promises. My mind simply refuses to stay within the lines most days. kaže:
Of course they aren't required to. But if the curriculum for prep school is reserved strictly for students scoring 76 points or higher, then fine—let it be that way in Sioux Falls, Columbus, or Santa Monica. It shouldn't just be a privilege exclusive to Washington, D.C.
Perhaps the issue lies elsewhere entirely...

The fundamental issue lies with parents who exert this unbearable, relentless pressure on their children to pull straight A's just to secure a spot in those elite preparatory academies. By doing this, they aren't just stressing out their kids; they’re passing that crushing weight onto the teachers and the entire educational system that’s forced to uphold these rigid grading standards. It becomes quite absurd, really. Teachers end up being constantly hounded by these hyper-ambitious parents—who act as if their little prodigies are the next Einstein—demanding top marks. To get them off their backs, the instructors eventually just cave and hand out the A's. Then, predictably, these same parents turn around and blame the local schools and the faculty, accusing them of being biased or refusing to recognize their child's "genius." It’s a vicious cycle. Ultimately, because the grading system loses all its integrity, high schools in Washington, D.C. are left with no choice but to implement grueling entrance exams just to sort out the chaos.
I must say, I find myself feeling quite heavyhearted at the moment. It is a rather somber sensation, truly.

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, if you literally have to kill yourself just to hit the GPA needed for enrollment—whether that's a 3.2, a 3.5, or a perfect 4.0—then honestly, you probably aren't a good fit for that track to begin with.
Does that make sense?

Plus, nobody is stopping New Yorkers from just applying to a high school in a different city where the GPA requirements are lower—since everyone seems so incredibly bitter about the cities where you need a perfect 4.0 just to get in. ☕

And thirdly, I still haven't had anyone explain to me how high school admissions are somehow responsible for all the hysteria regarding GPAs and those "honor roll" certificates people obsess over during the first four years of middle school.

Not quite... ☕
because New Yorkers are the most affected...
In NYC, being an excellent student isn't even enough, whereas in other parts of the country, you can get into high school even with a C average (I'm exaggerating, I think the cutoff is around 52 points)...
The madness started when they abolished entrance exams, and now every year the score requirements for high school just keep climbing...
It triggered a domino effect; parents pressure the kids and the teachers, kids end up with unrealistic grades, some schools have everyone pulling straight A's while others (the more realistic ones) don't, and naturally, everyone is frustrated...

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, if you literally have to kill yourself just to hit the GPA needed for enrollment—whether that's a 3.2, a 3.5, or a perfect 4.0—then honestly, you probably aren't a good fit for that track to begin with.
Does that make sense?

Plus, nobody is stopping New Yorkers from just applying to a high school in a different city where the GPA requirements are lower—since everyone seems so incredibly bitter about the cities where you need a perfect 4.0 just to get in. ☕

And thirdly, I still haven't had anyone explain to me how high school admissions are somehow responsible for all the hysteria regarding GPAs and those "honor roll" certificates people obsess over during the first four years of middle school.

They could, but it takes us an hour and a half to get from one side of town to the other anyway...

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, if you literally have to kill yourself just to hit the GPA needed for enrollment—whether that's a 3.2, a 3.5, or a perfect 4.0—then honestly, you probably aren't a good fit for that track to begin with.
Does that make sense?

Plus, nobody is stopping New Yorkers from just applying to a high school in a different city where the GPA requirements are lower—since everyone seems so incredibly bitter about the cities where you need a perfect 4.0 just to get in. ☕

And thirdly, I still haven't had anyone explain to me how high school admissions are somehow responsible for all the hysteria regarding GPAs and those "honor roll" certificates people obsess over during the first four years of middle school.

I explained it above; the insanity starts in first grade just to manufacture future straight-A students. You can't coast with B's for four years and then suddenly become an A student in fifth grade... 😁

In my opinion, the solution is implementing national standardized tests that account for at least 50% of high school admissions...

P.S. A professor from the local prep school told me they have a bunch of straight-A students entering high school who can't even add two fractions. This is our reality...

Jason Morgan said:

I suppose I should probably start by apologizing for my lack of brevity; I tend to wander off on tangents when I get thinking, much to the chagrin of those who prefer their information served in neat little bite-sized pieces. But I digress. Regarding the matter at hand—which, if I recall correctly, was sparked by some rather spirited debate earlier—it seems we have reached a bit of an impasse. It’s quite fascinating, really, how quickly a conversation can pivot from a simple observation to a full-blown philosophical disagreement. One moment you're discussing the weather in Columbus, and the next, you're questioning the very foundations of modern social etiquette. Anyway, I’ve been reflecting on what rowdypanther12 mentioned previously. While I don't entirely agree with the underlying premise—and there is quite a bit to disagree with, if I'm being perfectly honest—there is a certain logic to it that deserves acknowledgment. It’s like watching a slow-moving storm roll in over the coast; you know it's coming, you know it'll be messy, but you can't help but watch the way the clouds gather. I’ll attempt to be more concise in my following remarks, though I make no promises. My mind simply refuses to stay within the lines most days. kaže:
Of course they aren't required to. But if the curriculum for prep school is reserved strictly for students scoring 76 points or higher, then fine—let it be that way in Sioux Falls, Columbus, or Santa Monica. It shouldn't just be a privilege exclusive to Washington, D.C.
Perhaps the issue lies elsewhere entirely...

The fundamental issue lies with parents who exert this unbearable, relentless pressure on their children to pull straight A's just to secure a spot in those elite preparatory academies. By doing this, they aren't just stressing out their kids; they’re passing that crushing weight onto the teachers and the entire educational system that’s forced to uphold these rigid grading standards. It becomes quite absurd, really. Teachers end up being constantly hounded by these hyper-ambitious parents—who act as if their little prodigies are the next Einstein—demanding top marks. To get them off their backs, the instructors eventually just cave and hand out the A's. Then, predictably, these same parents turn around and blame the local schools and the faculty, accusing them of being biased or refusing to recognize their child's "genius." It’s a vicious cycle. Ultimately, because the grading system loses all its integrity, high schools in Washington, D.C. are left with no choice but to implement grueling entrance exams just to sort out the chaos.
I must say, I find myself feeling quite heavyhearted at the moment. It is a rather somber sensation, truly.

I don't think so.
The problem is the system itself, which requires a perfect 4.0 GPA if you want to get into a good prep school.

From what I can tell, even in those high-end prep schools, students still seem to pull in top-tier grades. In the ones where getting in is basically a bloodbath, the GPAs stay sky-high, and most kids just breeze through with straight A's.

Jason Morgan said:

I suppose I should probably start by apologizing for my lack of brevity; I tend to wander off on tangents when I get thinking, much to the chagrin of those who prefer their information served in neat little bite-sized pieces. But I digress. Regarding the matter at hand—which, if I recall correctly, was sparked by some rather spirited debate earlier—it seems we have reached a bit of an impasse. It’s quite fascinating, really, how quickly a conversation can pivot from a simple observation to a full-blown philosophical disagreement. One moment you're discussing the weather in Columbus, and the next, you're questioning the very foundations of modern social etiquette. Anyway, I’ve been reflecting on what rowdypanther12 mentioned previously. While I don't entirely agree with the underlying premise—and there is quite a bit to disagree with, if I'm being perfectly honest—there is a certain logic to it that deserves acknowledgment. It’s like watching a slow-moving storm roll in over the coast; you know it's coming, you know it'll be messy, but you can't help but watch the way the clouds gather. I’ll attempt to be more concise in my following remarks, though I make no promises. My mind simply refuses to stay within the lines most days. kaže:
Of course they aren't required to. But if the curriculum for prep school is reserved strictly for students scoring 76 points or higher, then fine—let it be that way in Sioux Falls, Columbus, or Santa Monica. It shouldn't just be a privilege exclusive to Washington, D.C.
Perhaps the issue lies elsewhere entirely...

The fundamental issue lies with parents who exert this unbearable, relentless pressure on their children to pull straight A's just to secure a spot in those elite preparatory academies. By doing this, they aren't just stressing out their kids; they’re passing that crushing weight onto the teachers and the entire educational system that’s forced to uphold these rigid grading standards. It becomes quite absurd, really. Teachers end up being constantly hounded by these hyper-ambitious parents—who act as if their little prodigies are the next Einstein—demanding top marks. To get them off their backs, the instructors eventually just cave and hand out the A's. Then, predictably, these same parents turn around and blame the local schools and the faculty, accusing them of being biased or refusing to recognize their child's "genius." It’s a vicious cycle. Ultimately, because the grading system loses all its integrity, high schools in Washington, D.C. are left with no choice but to implement grueling entrance exams just to sort out the chaos.
I must say, I find myself feeling quite heavyhearted at the moment. It is a rather somber sensation, truly.

Of course the issue is with the parents—I mean, what else would it be?
If we say the problem starts with the parents, then logically the system, the schools, and the teachers are essentially powerless, right? Because if they aren't the source of the problem, they can't fix it. According to that logic, everything only changes if the parents change first.
Does that actually make sense to you???

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, if you literally have to kill yourself just to hit the GPA needed for enrollment—whether that's a 3.2, a 3.5, or a perfect 4.0—then honestly, you probably aren't a good fit for that track to begin with.
Does that make sense?

Plus, nobody is stopping New Yorkers from just applying to a high school in a different city where the GPA requirements are lower—since everyone seems so incredibly bitter about the cities where you need a perfect 4.0 just to get in. ☕

And thirdly, I still haven't had anyone explain to me how high school admissions are somehow responsible for all the hysteria regarding GPAs and those "honor roll" certificates people obsess over during the first four years of middle school.

The real headache is that people are constantly traveling in from all sorts of different cities just to take up spots in Washington, D.C. It makes it pretty tough to find space when everyone is heading to the capital at once. 🤣
Honestly, if you want to lock in your spot, the only way to really guarantee it is to make sure you nail that five-point average. 😢
It seems like some kids are being judged solely on their grades because they just don't have many other ways to stack up points. Some kids aren't really into competitive stuff, and others simply don't get the chance at their school because they have to wait for a teacher to nominate them for things. On top of that, there aren't any points awarded for socioeconomic status—which, honestly, has basically become a way to track things like parental divorce rates over the years. And then there’s the health aspect, covering things like allergies or asthma. It feels like a missed opportunity; if we had just been smart enough to run those screenings back in elementary school instead of waiting until eighth grade, we might actually be seeing a fairer picture.
Just to clarify, since last year they changed the rules on how the scoring works. That specific point doesn't actually count toward your total score anymore; instead, it’s only used as a tiebreaker if two or more candidates end up with the exact same number of points.

I honestly agree—if a kid is spending their entire weekend struggling just to keep up with schoolwork, they probably aren't a good fit for a high-pressure prep school. It’s tough to see them burn out like that.
It’s especially tough when there aren't any extracurricular activities to balance things out—just school. I’ve definitely had those weekends where instead of going out or doing something fun, the parent ends up spending the whole time sitting at the table helping the kid study. It feels like you're stuck in limbo. And don't even get me started on winter or spring break! One thing that really gets under my skin is when teachers reschedule tests that were originally set right before a holiday. They push them back until after the break because kids and parents start complaining that it ruins their rhythm or that it would be "better" to just wait. Honestly, it's frustrating when the schedule shifts just to accommodate everyone's desire to relax. I honestly feel like if a kid is already feeling completely overwhelmed by having to take three tests in a single week, they might not be the right fit for a high-pressure prep school. It just doesn't seem sustainable.

Thinking back to how things used to be with the honors list... back in the early 2000s, throughout the month of June, they’d publish a full list of all the award winners in the evening paper. I remember my parents actually rushing down to the local newsstand just to grab a copy of the paper, all so they could scan the pages and find their kid's name. It was such a classic ritual.🤮It looks like you might have cut off your thought there! You were saying they cut it out and put it on the wall? I'm curious to hear the rest of the story—what exactly happened?🤮Then the internet really took off, social media exploded onto the scene, and suddenly everyone started posting their own testimonials and glowing reviews online.
On another note, I’ve had several people who actually work in schools tell me about this—and I think this topic has come up a few times on this forum already. It’s pretty wild. You have parents storming into an elementary school to confront a teacher just because their kid got a C on an English test. Then you have others scrutinizing math exams, arguing that if they spent the entire weekend studying with their child and the kid crushed it, a grade of 4 is simply unacceptable. Some of these kids end up being labeled as "difficult" or "tiring" just because of how their parents react, which honestly feels like such a joke when grades shouldn't carry that kind of weight. I’ve also heard whispers that teachers sometimes give easier questions during oral exams just to get through it quickly and avoid a confrontation with a parent later on. There are even rumors floating around that some tests are handed out in advance just to keep the peace. It’s a strange cycle.
I just want to get this pushy parent off my back once and for all.
Well, once someone like that pulls off a stunt like that, you really have to turn to someone more honorable. But honestly, it’s been a bit of a struggle lately because they’ve stumbled a few times—even during those oral exams where they had some pretty specific questions to tackle.
And just like that, it all begins.
I’ve been thinking about high school admissions lately, and honestly, I really believe entrance exams are a much better way to handle things than those massive national standardized tests. Don't get me wrong, I know everyone loves a good universal metric, but there's just something about specialized exams that feels more personal. I remember back when I was applying to high school, the big state-wide testing felt so impersonal—like you were just a number on a spreadsheet being processed by some giant bureaucracy. It was incredibly stressful because one bad morning could totally derail your future. With entrance exams, schools can actually look for specific talents. If a kid is a math whiz or an incredible artist, a targeted exam lets that shine in a way a general national test just doesn't. It feels more like finding the right fit for the student rather than just sorting kids into buckets. It’s a bit more nuanced, if you ask me!

I hope we haven't completely lost the plot here.
I’ve been thinking about this shift toward full-day schooling, and I have some concerns about how it might play out in the classroom. On one hand, the idea is that kids will get everything done during school hours, which sounds great for parents. In fact, the Secretary of Education mentioned that this should give families a huge breather once the new curriculum settles in, potentially cutting down the need for expensive after-school tutoring since everything is covered under one roof. However, I worry about the unintended pressure this puts on teachers. If parents expect everything to be wrapped up by the time the final bell rings, there might be an unspoken push for teachers to "soften" the grading just to keep things moving smoothly. We might even see students being pushed through practice tests for the SATs until they're completely burnt out, all just to ensure they meet certain benchmarks before heading home. It feels like a recipe for burnout for both the kids and the staff, even if the intention is to make life easier for busy families.
It’s definitely possible that a huge group of teachers will rush through the curriculum just to make sure everyone finishes everything on time, purely to prove that the whole experiment actually worked.

Back when we were about 30 in Elementary School, there was only one girl in our group of thirty who was a straight-A student—you know, a perfect 4.0 GPA—and today she’s a doctor at the Mayo Clinic. Most of us hovered around a 3.7 or 3.8, but hey, we all made it through college. It was significantly less grueling than pre-med, between the professors and the sheer workload. That divide feels very real to me; she was always a 4.0, and she maintained that intensity throughout her entire education. The rest of us—well, we played around a bit more (more or less)—so naturally, we ended up finishing degrees that were a little more manageable. It's a classic case: bright kids, but total slackers.

The ones who scraped by with a 3.0 managed to finish decent technical programs or even move on to university afterward. But, obviously—it’s nothing compared to the grind of being a med student. It makes me think of a former classmate from Elementary School who graduated with a degree in English / Pedagogy Department; he always used to complain that the English part was actually quite tough, especially the linguistics exercises, while the Pedagogy nonsense was just a joke. Then there was a girl who went into elementary education—she says it was a breeze, too.

Surprisingly enough, many of the kids who were considered "bad" students or barely passing are now highly respected business owners and tradespeople in the city. They grew up to be high-quality, hardworking people. Sure, they might not have known (and honestly, still don't) the subtle differences in grammar or spelling, but they are industrious and entrepreneurial. I have to admit, though, I often notice them pushing their own kids to be straight-A students—whereas those of us who actually *were* the overachievers aren't like that at all, at least not my crew.

I know everyone loves to say that "their era" was the golden age, but my youth really was much better, more grounded, and more normal than what we're seeing today.

Even with the war going on.

rowdypanther12 said:I don't think so.
The problem is the system itself, which requires a perfect 4.0 GPA if you want to get into a good prep school.

Prep schools don't actually demand a specific average. It's just that the competition is so cutthroat that you effectively need a 4.0 just to be considered.
And who, I ask you, is responsible for engineering this level of competition? Is it simply because we have an overwhelming surplus of child geniuses out there?
I find myself repeating the question: does absolutely everyone need to be funneled into a prep school?

Carl Bishop2 said:Of course the issue is with the parents—I mean, what else would it be?
If we say the problem starts with the parents, then logically the system, the schools, and the teachers are essentially powerless, right? Because if they aren't the source of the problem, they can't fix it. According to that logic, everything only changes if the parents change first.
Does that actually make sense to you???

It sounds perfectly logical, actually. 😵
But have any of you actually witnessed how parents behave toward teachers at an Elementary School? The sheer levels of harassment they endure when they grade students strictly by the rubric, knowing full well their children "deserve" a higher mark??
In a perfect world, I would love nothing more than to strip away the bureaucracy, the inspectors, the verbal assaults, and the constant intimidation from the teachers' doorsteps and just hand out straight A's to everyone. Of course, educators ought to maintain their academic standards, but they lack a system that actually protects them from these frantic "geniuses" and their equally intense offspring. So yes, the blame rests squarely on the system.

At the end of the day, the system itself is always responsible for its own rules and whatever messy consequences they trigger.

In the actual business world, you don't see companies pointing fingers at their management because they designed a brilliant product and a flawless marketing campaign only to have "mean" customers refuse to buy it. Instead, they realize the fault lies within. It’s only in this upside-down version of the education system where everyone involved claims they are perfectly righteous, while blaming the rest of the universe for everything that goes wrong. ☕

Michelle Nelson4 said:At the end of the day, the system itself is always responsible for its own rules and whatever messy consequences they trigger.

In the actual business world, you don't see companies pointing fingers at their management because they designed a brilliant product and a flawless marketing campaign only to have "mean" customers refuse to buy it. Instead, they realize the fault lies within. It’s only in this upside-down version of the education system where everyone involved claims they are perfectly righteous, while blaming the rest of the universe for everything that goes wrong. ☕

And then you have those miserable parents who refuse to shoulder even a shred of responsibility. It’s as if they honestly believe they aren't part of the system themselves—as though they exist entirely outside of its influence and have absolutely nothing to do with the mess we're in. ☕☕☕☕☕

If a kid walks into class with a 4.0 GPA without ever cracking a book, they’re a total genius.
Or maybe teachers are just handing out easy A's.

I know the type you mean—those kids who struggle through hours of tutoring and endless studying just to scrape by with an A.
But you have to realize those kids wouldn't even get the A if grades weren't being handed out so freely.
An A isn't just about memorizing facts. It's about being able to connect the dots and actually draw a conclusion.
And you definitely can't teach that kind of intuition through rote instruction.

How should parents actually step up and take responsibility here? As a parent of a kid just starting first grade, I’m feeling a bit lost—what am I supposed to do right now, being stuck inside this broken system?

Carl Bishop2 said:Of course the issue is with the parents—I mean, what else would it be?
If we say the problem starts with the parents, then logically the system, the schools, and the teachers are essentially powerless, right? Because if they aren't the source of the problem, they can't fix it. According to that logic, everything only changes if the parents change first.
Does that actually make sense to you???

And apparently, this is an issue exclusive to parents living in New York City. It's almost as if families in smaller towns like Des Moines don't have high expectations for their kids, which explains why those children breeze right into prep school without any drama.
That’s obviously far from the truth—there are plenty of parents everywhere who push their children toward straight A's, piano lessons, and French classes. Some handle the pressure somehow, while others end up on antidepressants or, worse, engaging in self-harm...
But claiming that a child needs a perfect 4.0 GPA just to be considered "prep school material" is complete nonsense—and it's a notion being actively supported by the faculty. It implies you have to be flawless in everything, that you need a passion for every subject, an affinity for every task...
So, I have to ask you all—when you take something up, does everything always go perfectly, or are you allowed to mess up occasionally without being consumed by guilt?
These kids are starting from such a massive disadvantage just to get enrolled. They study purely for the sake of the grade, rarely for the actual joy of learning. And as for the system itself—it isn't just flawed.
It is so deeply broken that it honestly should have been overhauled yesterday.

Kate Jackson4 said:Not quite... ☕
because New Yorkers are the most affected...
In NYC, being an excellent student isn't even enough, whereas in other parts of the country, you can get into high school even with a C average (I'm exaggerating, I think the cutoff is around 52 points)...
The madness started when they abolished entrance exams, and now every year the score requirements for high school just keep climbing...
It triggered a domino effect; parents pressure the kids and the teachers, kids end up with unrealistic grades, some schools have everyone pulling straight A's while others (the more realistic ones) don't, and naturally, everyone is frustrated...

They could, but it takes us an hour and a half to get from one side of town to the other anyway...

I explained it above; the insanity starts in first grade just to manufacture future straight-A students. You can't coast with B's for four years and then suddenly become an A student in fifth grade... 😁

In my opinion, the solution is implementing national standardized tests that account for at least 50% of high school admissions...

P.S. A professor from the local prep school told me they have a bunch of straight-A students entering high school who can't even add two fractions. This is our reality...

Man, you folks in NYC really do have some intense issues, and I'm not even talking about school admissions.
Honestly, there's this level of bitterness and jealousy toward anything that might be easier or better in any other part of America, and it's getting kind of unhealthy.
It feels like you'd rather the whole country deal with the same soul-crushing traffic jams you have, or the same crazy restrictions, and—of course—the same insane 70-point threshold for getting into a decent high school. Like, if two kids manage to squeeze in, fine, but why should they get in with a 60 when my kid couldn't even make it with a 69?!
A few colleagues of mine recently had total meltdowns over the qualifying scores for regional competitions... it just doesn't feel fair that kids in rural areas like Nebraska or maybe parts of Florida can qualify with 45 points, while my students in the city are stuck because they only hit 47. I mean, apparently, according to them, the rest of America should just forfeit their regional competitions entirely just to keep things "fair." That would be the only way to satisfy them, I guess. ☕

Sarah Hall53 said:Man, you folks in NYC really do have some intense issues, and I'm not even talking about school admissions.
Honestly, there's this level of bitterness and jealousy toward anything that might be easier or better in any other part of America, and it's getting kind of unhealthy.
It feels like you'd rather the whole country deal with the same soul-crushing traffic jams you have, or the same crazy restrictions, and—of course—the same insane 70-point threshold for getting into a decent high school. Like, if two kids manage to squeeze in, fine, but why should they get in with a 60 when my kid couldn't even make it with a 69?!
A few colleagues of mine recently had total meltdowns over the qualifying scores for regional competitions... it just doesn't feel fair that kids in rural areas like Nebraska or maybe parts of Florida can qualify with 45 points, while my students in the city are stuck because they only hit 47. I mean, apparently, according to them, the rest of America should just forfeit their regional competitions entirely just to keep things "fair." That would be the only way to satisfy them, I guess. ☕

Please, enlighten me... what exactly is "fair" about this scenario? ☕
Why on earth are students with lower scores moving forward?...

mellowskipper said:And apparently, this is an issue exclusive to parents living in New York City. It's almost as if families in smaller towns like Des Moines don't have high expectations for their kids, which explains why those children breeze right into prep school without any drama.
That’s obviously far from the truth—there are plenty of parents everywhere who push their children toward straight A's, piano lessons, and French classes. Some handle the pressure somehow, while others end up on antidepressants or, worse, engaging in self-harm...
But claiming that a child needs a perfect 4.0 GPA just to be considered "prep school material" is complete nonsense—and it's a notion being actively supported by the faculty. It implies you have to be flawless in everything, that you need a passion for every subject, an affinity for every task...
So, I have to ask you all—when you take something up, does everything always go perfectly, or are you allowed to mess up occasionally without being consumed by guilt?
These kids are starting from such a massive disadvantage just to get enrolled. They study purely for the sake of the grade, rarely for the actual joy of learning. And as for the system itself—it isn't just flawed.
It is so deeply broken that it honestly should have been overhauled yesterday.

👍

Kate Jackson4 said:Please, enlighten me... what exactly is "fair" about this scenario? ☕
Why on earth are students with lower scores moving forward?...

It’s because they fall into that top 5 or 10% within their own state, so they’re basically just competing against everyone else in their specific state.
Then, once they hit the national level, everything shifts back to pure points. That’s how you end up with half the national competition being filled with kids from the Northeast, while nobody from the Midwest even shows up. And hey, I guess technically it's fair since it's based on the numbers.
But honestly? It would probably be better if we just skipped the state-level stuff entirely for those rural areas where there isn't much opportunity for these kids anyway—just to make it crystal clear that only the kids from places like New York City or LA actually stand a chance at these things. ☕

Kate Jackson4 said:Please, enlighten me... what exactly is "fair" about this scenario? ☕
Why on earth are students with lower scores moving forward?...

They move forward because nobody actually knows what the higher score threshold should be. If they just set a rigid rule saying, say, you need 50 points to qualify, then absolutely no one from that specific county would make the cut.

It’s fundamentally unfair... if they were actually following the logic of smaller districts, they’d have to include those from Chicago too.
That would be fair...

Not every school in the rural counties is subpar; there are plenty of excellent schools and students out there.
Chicago is just massive, so naturally, they have more kids participating in competitions.

If they're truly looking to boost enrollment in prep schools and universities, they should probably focus their efforts on Chicago and other major hubs.

By the way, did you catch the news about what they want to implement in vocational schools next year? They’re planning to scrap standalone subjects like Chemistry and Physics, merging them into other courses instead.

The end result might be that once these kids finish vocational training, they won't even be eligible for the SATs or college entrance exams... or at least their options will be incredibly limited.