Posts
I do.
But their op eddery on the subject of parents is wretched.
e.g.:
We Are All Lindsays Now
Last week, after Lindsay Lohan was booked on misdemeanor charges of suspicion of driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license, and felony charges of possession of cocaine and transport of a narcotic — which could earn her jail time — Nicole Richie received her own sentence of 90 hours in jail and three years of probation for driving under the influence of drugs.
[snip]
Who or what's to blame?
[snip]
[T]heir breakdowns ... point to larger problems with a culture that, in varied ways, hurries young people through childhood and adolescence. Ms. Lohan missed having a normal childhood because she has lousy parents and because she is an actress.
But many young women, and young men, rush over stages of development for other reasons: Their lives are overbooked with extra-curricular activities, homework, and SAT tutoring, and their and their parents' attention is focused on how to get into the right college, rather than how to become the kind of grounded person who can really benefit from college, and then go on to lead a productive and fulfilling life.
In the scramble for external rewards, like top grades or sports championships, neither children nor their parents make enough time for the small things that contribute to a centered identity, for which no trophies are given. Reading for pleasure, experiences in nature, and family conversation come to mind. The number of children and adolescents being medicated for hyperactivity, anxiety, or depression are evidence of the psychological distortions that our society's mixed messages and mixed-up values produce.
etc.
So..... here we have an exercise in analogy.
Lindsay Lohan's mom is to Lindsay Lohan as helicopter parent is to high-achieving adolescent.
question: Does Lindsay Lohan's mom bear any conceivable resemblance to your basic grade-grubbling, SAT-fearing suburban parent?
answer: No. She does not.
Lindsay Lohan's mom (photo)
"Meanwhile, while the elder Lohan also reveals that she led a couple of interventions for Lindsay in the past and tried to convince her daughter to go to rehab, she says - in a nationally circulated publication - that such knowledge isn’t for the public to know.
“Like if your child’s in high school and they have a bulimia problem or they’re ADD, you’re not going to stand on the stage and go, Oh, my kid’s screwed up. I’m sorry, that’s disgusting.” " Diabolical Dina Lohan: We're a Normal Family
helicopter mom (photo)
"She has been my best friend through many obstacles, and I want to live near her (or near enough to visit her). I would like to be the parent that she has been to me, to watch my children grow up with the comfort of having an attentive parent at all times, what my mom used to call the “helicopter syndrome,” as an attentive parent hovers over her brood to make sure their needs are met. One of the first pictures I took with my digital camera was of her."
source: daughter's essay
See?
...............................
bonus find: The Role of Prior Knowledge in Analogy Use (pdf file)
28 comments:
I know next to nothing about Lindsay Lohan. I doubt I could pick her out of a line-up if I had to, so I really can't express any kind of an opinion on Lindsay or her mom.
But it seems like I just read a couple of op eds in the not so distant past of how we parents are infantalizing our kids (is that a real word?)
We don't allow them responsibility. Adolescence lasts too long. Kids never really grow up anymore.
Makes my head spin. Either I'm pushing my kids into adulthood too fast or keeping them children too long.
I guess I'll just revert to ignoring all those talking heads.
It seems to me that the increased competition for spots at elite colleges has enabled them to require applicants to be "superstars." It's not enough that the child has taken challenging courses and scored well on his/her ACT or SAT. We want to see if you excelled at a sport, or in music or drama or some other activity as well. And by the way, did you take an active leadership role in those activities?
And that's not enough, either. What about your volunteer activities? Show us that you care. Show us that you have spent any available free time engaged in helping others. Oh, and what about employment? Tell us about your work experiences. You didn't have time to work because of all of the above activities? Well, what's wrong with you? How in the world can you succeed in the real world if you can't balance work with school with your social life with outside activities and with, above all else, your volunteer activities where you show how much you are able to give back!!
Sorry for sounding so cynical. I actually think that balance is important, and that it IS a good idea for kids to volunteer and all of those good things. However, I think (having experienced this with my recent high school graduate), that the pressure imposed on students to excel in every endeavor that they undertake can be enormous.
I just love it when two completely unrelated blogs post thematically-related material on the same day, for completely unrelated reasons:
Sheila O'Malley on Dean Stockwell
Stockwell has been quite open about how unhappy he was as a child. He had no childhood. He was a working man by the age of 8, and he supported the family with his movies. He felt the pressure, he didn't enjoy acting - it just happened to be something he was very good at. His education was very spotty - he has said he had to go back, as an adult, and teach himself how to read. He didn't go to a normal school until he was 15, 16 ... He dropped out for a while, changed his name, moved around the country, had girlfriends who didn't know who he was (remember, he had been a major star as a kid, no experience of anonymity) - and finally came back in his 20s, because he realized - I have no skills to do anything else, I'm an actor, I can do this and do it well - it's a SKILL. He has said he didn't really enjoy acting until he was in his 40s. Kind of amazing. He was GOOD at something, very early on, and he was amply rewarded for it. But the rewards meant nothing. He wanted to be a normal kid and play football and not have to do those stupid crying scenes in movies. He was a worried person, very early on.
[Emphasis added]
I never knew this about him, and I'm very, very curious about how he was able to do it. I wonder if he devised some particular method, or if he is just that much of a prodigy that he could accomplish it instinctively. I strongly suspect that it's the latter, because it ties directly into one of the crippling weaknesses to constructivism: it really only works for a gifted few, and yet it assumes that anyone for whom it doesn't work must be deficient in some other way.
And by the way, did you take an active leadership role in those activities?
We had a funny moment vis a vis the leadership requirement.
The Dartmouth admissions officer was telling parents that a desireable applicant has demonstrated leadership.
So a parent stood up and asked, What if my kid isn't a leader?
The admissions officer said different people can be leaders in different ways. "A good follower is a good leader."
I think he also said that good leaders are good followers.
Fortunately I happened to be sitting next to a historian at the time, so I asked Ed whether good leaders make good followers.
No.
They don't.
History tells us this.
Knowing what I know about the college admissions process, which is that below the level of the Ivies ALL colleges are competing for students - and are offering "discounts" to lure students in - I'm starting to see the Mighty Battery of qualifications your child is supposed to "demonstrate" as a marketing ploy.
Either that, or a defense mechanism.
Speaking of colleges competing, I don't think I've posted about this.
The media doesn't particularly seem to have picked up on the fact that for several years now colleges have been competing intensely for the next-higher-up tier of students.
There are LOTS of merit scholarships out there --- LOTS.
Colleges call these scholarships "discounts." That is the actual term they use, which I've never seen in a news account.
AND what these colleges are mainly buying is SAT SCORES. (SAT or ACT)
This is why a focus on scores is a VERY, VERY good thing for people who are going to have to attempt to pay for a college education.
We are not rich people.
We need C. to have THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE SAT SCORES so he can get a "discount" from THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE COLLEGE.
This is a goal.
Independent George - what an amazing story!
I've always loved Dean Stockwell.
The whole issue of child prodigies and natural talent is pretty fascinating; I agree.
I don't know what to make of it.
When it comes to writing, I've finally had to think about this...because I was never taught to write (beyond sentences, I assume, though I don't remember being taught how to write those, either).
I'm completely self-taught, and that seems "natural" and "normal" to me.
Meanwhile all around me parents here have been lobbying for good writing instruction -- while I've been obsessing over good math instruction!
Lest this sound boastful, I don't think you have to be brilliant at what you do in order to be a "natural" at what you do....
This is actually one of my beefs with U.S. public schools in general, the lack of recognition for talent in kids with "problems." I've seen two kids with what I consider to be "natural talent" at math not being taught well or focused on because they've also been identified as having learning issues, which they do.
I don't know how far either of these kids could go with great teaching - maybe not that far.
But both of them have some kind of "natural" affinity for math, for numbers, for operations on numbers, etc.
I guess what I'm saying is that you can be a "natural" and still be in the middle of the bell curve.
Back to me & writing instruction, now that I've finally realized writing doesn't come naturally to most people, I've had to force myself to look at it as if I were a stranger to writing & learning how to write.
It's strange.
I'm also realizing that this is a GREAT thing for me to do!
Because I'm self-taught, I had no idea how much I could learn from people who know what they're talking about.
I hate to think how many simple errors in expression and structure I've been making for years because I'm self-taught.
"Colleges call these scholarships 'discounts.'"
Are these mostly grade-based (SAT or ACT), or are they hidden behind a need factor? How do you get discounts? Ask? Apply for financial aid? Do students get discounts without a need factor? I suppose that a college has a certain pot of money to use for discounts and they have to figure out where it should go. I expect it's a trade-off between need and grades.
But, do colleges separate acceptance from financial need, or are they intertwined? Do you get the letter of acceptance and then you haggle over the price, or do you get the discount offer with the acceptance?
I'm new to this and have a few years to figure it out, but I suppose I need to get up to speed. It sounds like it's best to apply to many colleges and then try to play one off the other. I did this sort of thing when I went out and got my first job. I went to several companies and each time, the job offer went up. I didn't blurt out what my other offers were, but it was quite clear that they wanted to know and I told them when they asked.
My son's piano teacher is a professor of music at our university and he was commenting about how they "put together a package" to bring in a student. Perhaps departments have to lobby if they want certain students. Perhaps the student got an acceptance offer and let the school know that attending would be difficult because the cost was too much. Then the discount process went into effect? It sounded like they wanted this student and had to improve the offer over another school to get him.
This is interesting. How can I find out more? I assumed that the only options were to apply for financial aid or apply for specific scholarships beforehand. It sounds like there is room for negotiation even after the acceptance letter is received. It seems like that's the beginning of the discounting process.
Steve--
We've just been through the whole college selection process, so I'll try to share some of what we've learned.
One of the best ways to qualify for merit-based aid is for your child to qualify as a National Merit Finalist. This is easier said than done, because these students are basically in the top 1% of all students taking the PSAT (in the fall of their junior year).
We're in the Midwest, and a lot of colleges in these parts primarily use ACT scores for admission purposes.
My advice would be to have your son start taking the ACT and SAT, in alternate years, starting in 6th grade. Somebody at your school district office should have information about this. For example, Northwestern sponsors a program called the Midwest Talent Search for kids in 6th-8th grades. I think Duke has a similar program.
In terms of merit-based aid in general, I think a lot of factors are at work. First, as a general rule (there are always exceptions) large state-supported institutions are less likely to award lots of merit-based scholarships. This depends in part, I think, on the size of their endowment. Some state-supported universities may offer Presidential scholarships to attract students who are slightly beyond their reach. Again, there are SO many variables at work here.
For example, the University of Illinois can be pretty selective in its admissions process because it is the premier state-supported university in a state with a large amount of college-bound students.
I think, also, that the private, liberal arts schools are all across the board as well, based on their own particular rank or standing. For example, one school with which I am familiar has a fixed limit on the amount of merit-based aid it will award; nobody gets more than that amount, period. Some may get less, and others may not get any, but nobody is going to get a full ride, period.
On the other hand, less elite schools may be more willing to open up their purses to attract a student with really high standardized test scores.
We have noticed that some colleges place a considerable amount of weight on the average ACT score for their entering freshman class. That is, it becomes a marketing tool, in effect. So, if a student is 4-8 points above the school's average, they may be more willing to offer more aid to that student than the student who is right at the average or who is below that average.
I don't know about the whole negotiation process after acceptancd. My kid received offers of merit-based aid with her acceptance letters. One school offered more aid and its tuition was slightly lower in general. I chose not to attempt to bargain with the other school (the school she chose). I tried to feel around with several people I knew to see if that was an option, and it didn't sound like it was. Also, the difference wasn't that significant.
I suggest also talking to anybody you know (friends, relatives, co-workers, etc.) about their experiences with the college search process. My approach was that the more I knew, the better. A colleague of mine cautioned me against what he called "trophy acceptances." That is, don't apply to a school just because you want to see if you can get in, if you don't really have any intention of going there, because getting rejected isn't as fun as it sounds.
On the other hand, we have known several students who had the Ivy League as their goal, so they applied to every school, with the hopes of getting into one.
A lot of K's friends used the approach of the "first choice" school and the "safety net" school. That is, they had a back up plan in case they didn't get into their first choice. Ultimately, the process itself is exhausting and time-consuming. The smaller schools want the students to make a campus visit. Some schools want to interview or meet with the students.
Then, of course, there's the whole question of fit. Some kids absolutely want the Big 10 experience. Some kids want to go out of state, just because it's different. Other kids want the small, liberal arts feel. Then there's the whole question of the location of the school itself. Some schools are located in the middle of nowhere, others are located in an urban environment.
As crazy and cliche as this may sound, a lot of kids will step onto a campus for a visit and say, "this feels like home."
Thank you Karen,
As I said, I have a ways to go. I agree with you in that the more you know, the better off your are.
"My advice would be to have your son start taking the ACT and SAT, in alternate years, starting in 6th grade."
Is this just for practice? He has taken the SCAT (5th grade) for the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth, but he hasn't taken any of their courses. If you take the tests multiple times, can you submit the best set of grades, or can you mix and match grades (verbal/math) from the best years?
Steve--
"Is this just for practice?"
Yes, basically, although it also can serve as a bit of a measuring stick as well. I'm pretty sure that the test scores prior to the junior year of high school are not part of the student's transcripts, but you could check with your school district regarding that. I'm almost positive that the scores from 6th-8th grade would not be part of the high school transcript.
In any event, when the student takes the ACT (I think the SAT works this way, also), they can designate which colleges they want to receive their test scores. I think you can have them submitted to four schools without an additional charge.
I do know that some of K's classmates took the ACT several times after taking it on the national test date during the junior year.
Are these mostly grade-based (SAT or ACT), or are they hidden behind a need factor? How do you get discounts? Ask? Apply for financial aid?
They are not need-based AT ALL.
Practically no one is aware of this.
I'll get this thread pulled up front (THINGS ARE PILING UP) - and I'll get Ed to remind me of everything his brother said. (His brother is the treasurer of Bryn Mawr.)
Actually, I pretty much remember without having to ask.
Ed's brother says that all but about 6 colleges in the country are in a state of competition with each other for good students - good meaning a cut above the student they normally get.
These students are defined by scores. Period.
Ed said that at NYU there is a constant focus on how their students' SATs compare to Columbia students' SATs. I think the Dean sends around notices with the information (I should check with him on this).
The entire college world is competing over standardized test scores while our K-12 schools are obsessing over authentic assessment!
Meanwhile college is horrifically expensive, and places like Scarsdale don't spend one second thinking, Gee, if we get rid of AP classes our kids' may have to spend more on college.
My friend K has a good friend with a very high-performing daughter. She did everything - captain of this, straight As, etc.
The family isn't wealthy, and the mom told K., "She just has to get ONE acceptance from an Ivy League school to get scholarships from everyone else."
(Karen - haven't read your comments yet - you may already have gone over this.)
"Merit scholarships" are the "dirty little secret"!
put together a package
right
this is happening everywhere
basically, at this point, whenever we hear of a good student going to a college that's slightly less competitive than what we would have expected that student to go to, we assume he or she has been given a scholarship
I'm trying to remember....I think pretty much every college kid whose details I know has had offers.
My friend J, in Chicago, was just waiting to see which college would offer her 2nd daughter more money.
I'm pretty sure my niece, who isn't a "top top" student, as the Scarsdale superintendent would say, had a merit offer from Muehlenberg College.
gosh, I wish I could find that great article where the admissions guy was talking about how parents "make them" give merit scholarships....
Here's an article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114549432060630668.html
Here's another:
http://www.collegeparents.org/cpa/about-in_news.html?n=1151
"The practice of discounting tuition to attract top students dates back to the 1970s in the Midwest. It moved East about 10 years ago and made its way into the elite schools in the past five years. Today, says Dan Lundquist, vice president of admissions and financial aid at Union College, Schnectedy, N.Y., "nobody is immune." He notes that even Ivy League colleges invite accepted students to submit competing financial offers for review."
This confirms what my brother-in-law said.
They are ALL doing it, except for the Ivies (and I assume Stanford - a couple of others).
My brother in law said, and I think I remember this exactly, that there are about 6 schools NOT doing it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1018472919238551320.html?mod=todays_us_personaljnl_hs
Actually, there are quite a few articles out there...they just aren't the dominant storyline.
The story you hear most often is the impossibility of getting into a decent college.
Here's a TIMES article from 10 years ago, also about merit aid.
http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/eep/news/college.html
"The entire college world is competing over standardized test scores while our K-12 schools are obsessing over authentic assessment!"
Every so often I hear about K-16 proposals by the K-12 education community in our state to try and make sure that state-funded college acceptance is NOT merit based.
"The family isn't wealthy, and the mom told K., 'She just has to get ONE acceptance from an Ivy League school to get scholarships from everyone else.'"
Is this a cause or an effect. In other words, do schools find out (do you tell them?) that you've been accepted at other schools? Do you go back and haggle (in a very nice way) after you have all of your acceptances in hand?
"My friend J, in Chicago, was just waiting to see which college would offer her 2nd daughter more money."
It sounds like it's mostly pre-calibrated and the offer comes with the acceptance. I'll take a look at your links.
" He notes that even Ivy League colleges invite accepted students to submit competing financial offers for review."
You just posted this so I missed it. Are they public about this, or is this something you have to be aggressive about? This seems to imply that early acceptance is not a good idea.
Squeezed on one side by state universities, whose tuition is a tiny fraction of what private colleges charge, and on the other by elite private institutions like Yale, Princeton or Amherst, private liberal arts colleges like Allegheny are routinely offering merit aid to students these days. Such scholarships are particularly pervasive in the Midwest, where many liberal arts colleges award them to as many as half or even three-quarters of their students.
Jan 1, 2006
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F60D13F83B540C728CDDA80894DE404482
Post a Comment