High School Guide: Admissions, reviews, and advice

redridge13 said:@redridge13, don't sleep on these kids

I was reading this thread about how kids as young as fifth or sixth grade are already deep in the weeds, debating which high schools to aim for and what the tuition looks like.
My little one actually started asking me about local high school options back in fifth grade because her friend’s older sister was going through the enrollment process at the time.

If you check the data on sites like GreatSchools, the stats might be from last year, but they give you a solid look at the trends for every school in the district—you can basically track the trajectory over the last five or six years if you dig.

Looking at that whole situation with the family over in Chicago, I’d say both the parents and the kid totally misjudged the situation.
And well, you know how it goes... once things go south, it’s all over the news.

Personally, I still hold her responsible. She didn't fulfill her parental duty regarding supervision. You can't just let a child navigate everything on their own without maintaining at least some level of oversight over the situation.

But honestly, that doesn't change the core issue—which is that the system itself is fundamentally broken. If a student has a 4.8 GPA, they should be able to enroll in an elite prep school without any hiccups. It feels like Americans are living in a fantasy land where we're surrounded by thousands of "perfect" students with straight A's who then end up performing well below average on actual tests. Or look at those standardized national exams, where maybe 0.1% of kids get top marks, yet somehow 20% of them claim to have had perfect scores throughout all four years of high school because they're supposedly "straight-A geniuses."

I honestly doubt those public high schools set up a unified entrance exam just to make things easier for parents. It’s more likely they did it because the sheer volume of applicants makes individual testing a logistical nightmare. Even so, I guess everything will eventually trickle back down to the individual schools.

@Michelle Nelson4
The whole system is a total joke.
If you ask me, they should bring back entrance exams—make grades worth 40% and the exam 60%, then we’d actually be getting somewhere...
They scrapped them under the guise of "reducing student stress" (yeah, right?), and now we’re stuck dealing with this absolute madness regarding GPA and grading inflation.

Honestly, if they just brought back those entrance tests, it would help weed out some of the issues we're seeing with dyslexia diagnoses and all the other nonsense currently flooding the schools.

Not really—I mean, if only having dyslexia, dysgraphia, and all those other "dis-" conditions actually meant getting extra time on entrance exams.

redridge13 said:@Michelle Nelson4
The whole system is a total joke.
If you ask me, they should bring back entrance exams—make grades worth 40% and the exam 60%, then we’d actually be getting somewhere...
They scrapped them under the guise of "reducing student stress" (yeah, right?), and now we’re stuck dealing with this absolute madness regarding GPA and grading inflation.

Honestly, if they just brought back those entrance tests, it would help weed out some of the issues we're seeing with dyslexia diagnoses and all the other nonsense currently flooding the schools.

The dyslexia epidemic isn't going away because those students still take their own specific assessments, plus they get special accommodations in elementary school (which leads to "better" grades)🥳
My sincere apologies to people actually struggling with dyslexia—I know they exist and are being underserved by this situation, even if I get called heartless here for speaking up about kids with learning difficulties)

redridge13 said:@Michelle Nelson4
The whole system is a total joke.
If you ask me, they should bring back entrance exams—make grades worth 40% and the exam 60%, then we’d actually be getting somewhere...
They scrapped them under the guise of "reducing student stress" (yeah, right?), and now we’re stuck dealing with this absolute madness regarding GPA and grading inflation.

Honestly, if they just brought back those entrance tests, it would help weed out some of the issues we're seeing with dyslexia diagnoses and all the other nonsense currently flooding the schools.

Oh, I completely agree. It feels like we're constantly reading posts from people within the school administration implying that parents are somehow "unstable" if they don't have a perfect 4.0. There's such an immediate, public backlash whenever someone questions things, where they reflexively blame "overbearing moms" with this palpable sense of condescension, acting as if the student had no other choice. Honestly, it feels like a deep-seated systemic issue that's taken root...

Michelle Nelson4 said:Personally, I still hold her responsible. She didn't fulfill her parental duty regarding supervision. You can't just let a child navigate everything on their own without maintaining at least some level of oversight over the situation.

But honestly, that doesn't change the core issue—which is that the system itself is fundamentally broken. If a student has a 4.8 GPA, they should be able to enroll in an elite prep school without any hiccups. It feels like Americans are living in a fantasy land where we're surrounded by thousands of "perfect" students with straight A's who then end up performing well below average on actual tests. Or look at those standardized national exams, where maybe 0.1% of kids get top marks, yet somehow 20% of them claim to have had perfect scores throughout all four years of high school because they're supposedly "straight-A geniuses."

So, the real question is: what does that GPA actually represent? 😉 And would they even pass the entrance exam?

The entrance exam would probably solve everything, but my guess is we'd just end up with a whole new batch of pissed-off parents.

By the way, back when I was applying for college (a lifetime ago 🙂), there were people who had maxed out their points based on grades alone and *still* couldn't hit the minimum cutoff.
You can't claim to have a 4.0 and then fail to solve a few basic physics or math problems.
Grades, unfortunately, haven't been a real measure of intelligence for a long time now.

Sarah Hall53 said:Not really—I mean, if only having dyslexia, dysgraphia, and all those other "dis-" conditions actually meant getting extra time on entrance exams.

Look, you can sit there staring at a prompt for three hours straight if you don't know how to solve the problem, but it doesn't matter—you're still stuck. 🙂

Michelle Nelson4 said:Oh, I completely agree. It feels like we're constantly reading posts from people within the school administration implying that parents are somehow "unstable" if they don't have a perfect 4.0. There's such an immediate, public backlash whenever someone questions things, where they reflexively blame "overbearing moms" with this palpable sense of condescension, acting as if the student had no other choice. Honestly, it feels like a deep-seated systemic issue that's taken root...

If you ask me, there are definitely parents out there who are way too "hands-on"🙂
those are the ones who'll still be sitting there hovering over their kids' homework even when they're halfway through college.

redridge13 said:So, the real question is: what does that GPA actually represent? 😉 And would they even pass the entrance exam?

The entrance exam would probably solve everything, but my guess is we'd just end up with a whole new batch of pissed-off parents.

By the way, back when I was applying for college (a lifetime ago 🙂), there were people who had maxed out their points based on grades alone and *still* couldn't hit the minimum cutoff.
You can't claim to have a 4.0 and then fail to solve a few basic physics or math problems.
Grades, unfortunately, haven't been a real measure of intelligence for a long time now.

Exactly. But let’s be real—if you don't show up for the exam, it doesn't matter how high your GPA is; a 4.8 won't save you if you aren't there. It's a total disqualification.

stormymarlin22 said:I honestly doubt those public high schools set up a unified entrance exam just to make things easier for parents. It’s more likely they did it because the sheer volume of applicants makes individual testing a logistical nightmare. Even so, I guess everything will eventually trickle back down to the individual schools.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure. There were plenty of news stories and articles about how hard it was for parents to drive their kids around since one exam was at 9 AM and another wasn't until noon.

Sure, there are tons of kids applying (I know a few who applied to almost every STEM school just to satisfy their parents' curiosity, even though they already knew where they wanted to go), but you don't need to fix that manually. The buildings are big enough—honestly, you just need to print the papers and make sure the kids are supervised.
The exams varied in difficulty depending on the specific problems given, but besides that, I think the kids really benefit from seeing how the teachers treat them during the entrance process. It creates that "halo effect" which is actually pretty important when you're choosing the hallways you'll be walking through for the next four years. Last year, when it was like 108 degrees outside, one school actually banned kids from bringing water bottles because they assumed they'd spill, or maybe they thought they were explosive devices like on an airplane—though even on a plane, you can bring water, you just have to buy it at the terminal.

Michelle Nelson4 said:Exactly. But let’s be real—if you don't show up for the exam, it doesn't matter how high your GPA is; a 4.8 won't save you if you aren't there. It's a total disqualification.

Look, it’s simple: the entrance exam needs to carry way more weight than the overall GPA. That’s the only way this works.
If some kid walks in with, say, 72 points based on his grades, but the exam is only worth 10%? He’s basically DOA regardless of how hard he tests.
He’d have to ace that exam perfectly, while someone coming in with a perfect 4.0 would have to fail it miserably just to stay even.
It’s totally unrealistic.

The way things are set up now, those exams are really just there to help filter through all the overachievers when the school hits capacity and can't take everyone.

I'm not saying it wasn't a massive headache for parents and kids to deal with multiple entrance exams, but I guess my point is more about how hard it was to motivate those prep schools to actually adopt a single standardized test.

redridge13 said:Look, it’s simple: the entrance exam needs to carry way more weight than the overall GPA. That’s the only way this works.
If some kid walks in with, say, 72 points based on his grades, but the exam is only worth 10%? He’s basically DOA regardless of how hard he tests.
He’d have to ace that exam perfectly, while someone coming in with a perfect 4.0 would have to fail it miserably just to stay even.
It’s totally unrealistic.

The way things are set up now, those exams are really just there to help filter through all the overachievers when the school hits capacity and can't take everyone.

The entrance exams for those elite prep schools these days are basically just math tests to filter out the top kids. If they actually wanted to make the exam carry more weight for admissions—even though it already counts for 10 points, which isn't nothing—they'd probably need to overhaul the whole thing first.

stormymarlin22 said:The entrance exams for those elite prep schools these days are basically just math tests to filter out the top kids. If they actually wanted to make the exam carry more weight for admissions—even though it already counts for 10 points, which isn't nothing—they'd probably need to overhaul the whole thing first.

Exactly. You'd basically have to tear down and rebuild the whole damn system from scratch.

Jose Wells3 said:Here’s how I always frame the argument:

If there is just one kid in a class who can actually navigate this broken system and pull top grades without private tutors, constant parental hand-holding, or any extra help—just pure independence—then the system isn't impossible. It just means some people need to actually put in the work, find better study habits, or simply accept that nothing happens without effort.

As for high school? If you aren't independent, you're headed straight for disaster.

But fine, I'll admit it: those were the clients who kept me in business. Once moms realized they could just pay for a tutor to fix their kid's grades, the money started flowing. By Friday, I was usually tipsy and high on their dime. Honestly, I treated myself to plenty of luxuries back then because money was tight. Let them think what they want.

Does that sound condescending? I couldn't care less if it does; it’s just the truth. Real intelligence is about being resourceful when things get messy. Any smart kid spends the first month scanning the teachers, figuring out their personalities, and learning how to play the game. And if a teacher is terrible? Well, everything you need is in the textbook. If someone can't even finish high school by reading the books and managing their own learning, they have zero chance at a university. Period.

The idea of "scanning a teacher to figure out who they are" is really about having sharp perception. I wouldn't go as far as labeling kids unintelligent just because they haven't mastered reading their instructors yet or haven't developed that specific type of intuition. I don't see the point in doing that. 😕 Surely the goal is to learn, acquire knowledge, and understand the curriculum, rather than "scanning teachers" just to coast toward an A. When you focus on "scanning," aren't you just looking for the highest output—the grade—with the minimum input, relying on cleverness rather than actual knowledge? 😕 You're conflating intelligence with being well-educated.

And regarding the whole "everything is in the books" point: are we talking about standard school textbooks? Most textbooks from 2019 are absolute disasters; I've often found myself staring at a page wondering how the authors could possibly understand the subject matter when they write so incoherently. Even when I talk to teachers, they confirm this and explain exactly why the quality is so low. Not to mention how disappointing it is that students are constantly told to just look things up online. Both teachers and textbook authors push them toward the internet. The web—even random sites—is treated as a gold mine of ultimate truth. Wikipedia becomes the beginning and end of all research. You actually need highly developed research skills and foreign language proficiency because, in the US, much of the high-quality material isn't available in plain English or local contexts, requiring you to filter through sources to find what's actually good. Finding and selecting the right, high-quality sources is a massive challenge for adults, let alone children. And besides, premium educational websites and databases aren't exactly free.

Your post comes across as quite arrogant, almost dismissive.

While "finding better study strategies" sounds like a fine sentiment, and I agree with it, I wouldn't write off a child just because they haven't naturally developed the ability to find those strategies or overcome their weaknesses yet. I wouldn't predict a dark academic future for them right out of the gate.

Jose Wells3 said:Here’s how I always frame the argument:

If there is just one kid in a class who can actually navigate this broken system and pull top grades without private tutors, constant parental hand-holding, or any extra help—just pure independence—then the system isn't impossible. It just means some people need to actually put in the work, find better study habits, or simply accept that nothing happens without effort.

As for high school? If you aren't independent, you're headed straight for disaster.

But fine, I'll admit it: those were the clients who kept me in business. Once moms realized they could just pay for a tutor to fix their kid's grades, the money started flowing. By Friday, I was usually tipsy and high on their dime. Honestly, I treated myself to plenty of luxuries back then because money was tight. Let them think what they want.

Does that sound condescending? I couldn't care less if it does; it’s just the truth. Real intelligence is about being resourceful when things get messy. Any smart kid spends the first month scanning the teachers, figuring out their personalities, and learning how to play the game. And if a teacher is terrible? Well, everything you need is in the textbook. If someone can't even finish high school by reading the books and managing their own learning, they have zero chance at a university. Period.

I agree with your last point completely, word for word. My only tiny disclaimer is that school textbooks can be pretty terrible, but luckily we have the power of Google and other resources to fill the gaps.

Regarding those students you used to tutor: would you actually offer your services to them if they were direct competition to your own child starting school?

Dennis Alvarez2 said:The idea of "scanning a teacher to figure out who they are" is really about having sharp perception. I wouldn't go as far as labeling kids unintelligent just because they haven't mastered reading their instructors yet or haven't developed that specific type of intuition. I don't see the point in doing that. 😕 Surely the goal is to learn, acquire knowledge, and understand the curriculum, rather than "scanning teachers" just to coast toward an A. When you focus on "scanning," aren't you just looking for the highest output—the grade—with the minimum input, relying on cleverness rather than actual knowledge? 😕 You're conflating intelligence with being well-educated.

And regarding the whole "everything is in the books" point: are we talking about standard school textbooks? Most textbooks from 2019 are absolute disasters; I've often found myself staring at a page wondering how the authors could possibly understand the subject matter when they write so incoherently. Even when I talk to teachers, they confirm this and explain exactly why the quality is so low. Not to mention how disappointing it is that students are constantly told to just look things up online. Both teachers and textbook authors push them toward the internet. The web—even random sites—is treated as a gold mine of ultimate truth. Wikipedia becomes the beginning and end of all research. You actually need highly developed research skills and foreign language proficiency because, in the US, much of the high-quality material isn't available in plain English or local contexts, requiring you to filter through sources to find what's actually good. Finding and selecting the right, high-quality sources is a massive challenge for adults, let alone children. And besides, premium educational websites and databases aren't exactly free.

Your post comes across as quite arrogant, almost dismissive.

While "finding better study strategies" sounds like a fine sentiment, and I agree with it, I wouldn't write off a child just because they haven't naturally developed the ability to find those strategies or overcome their weaknesses yet. I wouldn't predict a dark academic future for them right out of the gate.

Maybe in some utopia that's true, but in America, the objective is to grab an A by any means necessary because that's the only thing that guarantees a future. As we all know, anything less than an A is a massive risk; a C is barely better than a zero. No intelligent person wastes time studying for "knowledge" alone, because nobody actually cares about what you know.

It's like when Joe was playing poker and realized everyone else was playing fair—that's exactly when he started losing his shirt.

mellowskipper said:I think that was Anderson Cooper.
That’s why we’re looking at those first three schools as our Plan A—mostly because they’re right around the corner and only take one class per grade. The other three schools are more of a Plan B, though I guess she'll definitely get into them.

Smart move!

nimblelynx7 said:Maybe in some utopia that's true, but in America, the objective is to grab an A by any means necessary because that's the only thing that guarantees a future. As we all know, anything less than an A is a massive risk; a C is barely better than a zero. No intelligent person wastes time studying for "knowledge" alone, because nobody actually cares about what you know.

It's like when Joe was playing poker and realized everyone else was playing fair—that's exactly when he started losing his shirt.

It’s not really that they don't want to learn for knowledge's sake, because you can see that in some places, people actually *do* test for actual understanding.
And honestly, it's a good thing they ask—they should probably ask even more often.

At the end of the day, students in high school need to build on those foundations. They need certain core skills and need to be sitting in the same classrooms as kids who actually have some competence.

It’s such a shame that getting a C (especially in a minor subject) puts a kid at risk of being denied entry into a STEM program that actually has the capacity for them. It's frustrating that kids who would crush it in math, physics, or computer science can't get into those specialized tracks because computer science isn't even weighted heavily, and if they trip up on PE—and I know plenty of these kids!—they're out. Even if they excel in foreign languages or find themselves in a classroom dominated by a specific political clique or even biology, they don't stand a chance at even qualifying for the entrance exams.
And there have been—and still are—cases where kids from STEM programs get pushed into general tracks because physics becomes too much, or they struggle for four years straight because they never developed study habits, sometimes ending up in mental health facilities simply because their parents picked the school for them.

I think this "elite" hype surrounding certain schools was manufactured by a specific circle of parents. They feel pressured to enroll their kids in their old alma maters, or the schools their friends' kids go to, or whichever school is ranked best nationally on the news after they move from a rural area into a major city like Chicago... then the cycle of extra tutoring and pressure on teachers begins, regardless of the child's actual aptitude or how they'll handle the workload in high school.