Grades, ACT, financial aid?

You calculate the ACT index by adding the scores from the 4 sections of the ACT together. 

NCAA minimum GPA is 2.0.  Schools can have a higher minimum.  The 3.5 GPA requirement mentioned is for the additional automatic "aid".

Schools can have different qualifications than NCAA.  When it comes to scholarship dollars the school determines what grades/scores/rank deserves the money.  You should make sure to clarify if these standards are mutually exclusive. 

Iowamom23 posted:

Visited a school that offered 2018 a decent bb scholarship. School also offers automatic aid to students with a certain GPA/ACT score, which son easily surpasses.

I asked coach if this could be stacked and he said yes, as long as son has a 3.5 GPA, an ACT index of over 100 or is in the top 10% of high school class. Son is close but under on GPA and won't achieve the last. I went to a web site that claims to calculate his ACT index at over 100.

I get that the 3.5 is part of NCAA requirements, but had never heard of the 100 plus ACT index. Is that really a thing? Who decides what that score is for sure? When would you find out? Is that standard at all schools or just this one? Should I be asking coach for more information or financial aid?

Hoping son gets the GPA to 3.5, but in the meantime, if this index thing is real, I'll sleep better. So any help you can provide would be terrific!

 

My understanding is that you have to meet one of the three criteria of 3.5 GPA, 10% of high school class, or 25 ACT if you are getting academic aid on top of the baseball money for it not to count against the overall baseball scholarship total.  If you do not meet one of the three then any academic aid counts against the total baseball scholarship budget.  It sounds like the coach is telling your son that if he doesn't meet that criteria he is going to have to choose between the baseball money or the academic money.  It is a fairly common practice but a lot of parents have no idea it exists. 

d-mac posted:

Iowamom23 posted:

Visited a school that offered 2018 a decent bb scholarship. School also offers automatic aid to students with a certain GPA/ACT score, which son easily surpasses.

I asked coach if this could be stacked and he said yes, as long as son has a 3.5 GPA, an ACT index of over 100 or is in the top 10% of high school class. Son is close but under on GPA and won't achieve the last. I went to a web site that claims to calculate his ACT index at over 100.

I get that the 3.5 is part of NCAA requirements, but had never heard of the 100 plus ACT index. Is that really a thing? Who decides what that score is for sure? When would you find out? Is that standard at all schools or just this one? Should I be asking coach for more information or financial aid?

Hoping son gets the GPA to 3.5, but in the meantime, if this index thing is real, I'll sleep better. So any help you can provide would be terrific!

 

My understanding is that you have to meet one of the three criteria of 3.5 GPA, 10% of high school class, or 25 ACT if you are getting academic aid on top of the baseball money for it not to count against the overall baseball scholarship total.  If you do not meet one of the three then any academic aid counts against the total baseball scholarship budget.  It sounds like the coach is telling your son that if he doesn't meet that criteria he is going to have to choose between the baseball money or the academic money.  It is a fairly common practice but a lot of parents have no idea it exists. 

Thank you!! Coach said ACT index of 100, which I think he's at 96 after taking it once. Got an overall 24. So either way, hopefully he can get that score up on this next try. I suggested a test-prep class, he said he's going to try answering all the questions this time. :-)

Iowamom23 posted:

d-mac posted:

Iowamom23 posted:

Visited a school that offered 2018 a decent bb scholarship. School also offers automatic aid to students with a certain GPA/ACT score, which son easily surpasses.

I asked coach if this could be stacked and he said yes, as long as son has a 3.5 GPA, an ACT index of over 100 or is in the top 10% of high school class. Son is close but under on GPA and won't achieve the last. I went to a web site that claims to calculate his ACT index at over 100.

I get that the 3.5 is part of NCAA requirements, but had never heard of the 100 plus ACT index. Is that really a thing? Who decides what that score is for sure? When would you find out? Is that standard at all schools or just this one? Should I be asking coach for more information or financial aid?

Hoping son gets the GPA to 3.5, but in the meantime, if this index thing is real, I'll sleep better. So any help you can provide would be terrific!

 

My understanding is that you have to meet one of the three criteria of 3.5 GPA, 10% of high school class, or 25 ACT if you are getting academic aid on top of the baseball money for it not to count against the overall baseball scholarship total.  If you do not meet one of the three then any academic aid counts against the total baseball scholarship budget.  It sounds like the coach is telling your son that if he doesn't meet that criteria he is going to have to choose between the baseball money or the academic money.  It is a fairly common practice but a lot of parents have no idea it exists. 

Thank you!! Coach said ACT index of 100, which I think he's at 96 after taking it once. Got an overall 24. So either way, hopefully he can get that score up on this next try. I suggested a test-prep class, he said he's going to try answering all the questions this time. :-)

 

If he made a 24 the first time with no prep, I'd expect at least a 2-4 point increase with prep.  The time constraint is the most difficult part.  There are some great youtube videos out there on test taking tips and tricks.  

The ACT sum is 105 for D1.

IowaMom23, is this a Division I or Division II school that offered your son?  The reason I ask is that the numbers you quoted from the coach are a mix of the Division I and Division II requirements.

By the way, D-Mac was correct on his explanation, but again the numbers don't line up as all D-1 or D-2 requirements.

Bylaw 15.02.4.3 covers this. I do believe it is 100 for D2, though. There are also several types of scholarship aid that are exempt from this rule. 

My 2018 is currently at 104, which is frustrating as hell!

I think this is the right list of exempted scholarships:

15.02.4.3 Exempted Institutional Financial Aid. The following institutional financial aid is exempt and is not counted in determining the institution’s financial aid limitations: (Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04)

(a) An honorary award for outstanding academic achievement or an established institutional research grant that meets the criteria set forth in Bylaw 15.02.6 (and must be included in determining if the student athlete’s cost of attendance has been met); (Revised: 1/10/91, 1/10/92, 10/31/02 effective 8/1/03)

(b) A postgraduate scholarship awarded by an institution in accordance with Bylaw 16.1.4.1.1; (Adopted: 4/25/02)

(c) Federal government grants awarded based on a student’s demonstrated financial need [e.g., Supplemental Educational Opportunities Grant (SEOG)], regardless of whether the institution is responsible for selecting the recipient or determining the amount of aid, or providing matching or supplementary funds for a previously determined recipient; (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

(d) State government grants awarded based on a student’s demonstrated financial need, regardless of whether the institution is responsible for selecting the recipient or determining the amount of aid, or providing matching or supplementary funds for a previously determined recipient, provided the aid is administered in accordance with the federal methodology for determining a student’s financial need and has no relationship to athletics ability. However, such aid is not exempt for purposes of determining a football or basketball student-athlete’s counter status pursuant to Bylaw 15.5.1.2; (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

(e) State government merit-based grants, regardless of whether the institution is responsible for selecting the recipient or determining the amount of aid, or providing matching or supplementary funds for a previously determined recipient, provided the aid is awarded consistent with the criteria of Bylaws 15.5.3.2.2.1, 15.5.3.2.2.2 or 15.5.3.2.2.3 and has no relationship to athletics ability. However, such aid is not exempt for purposes of determining a football or basketball student-athlete’s counter status pursuant to Bylaw 15.5.1.2; and (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

(f) Matching payments made by the Department of Veterans Affairs pursuant to the Yellow Ribbon G.I. Education Enhancement Program [see Bylaw 15.2.5.1-(e)]. (Adopted: 1/15/11 effective 8/1/11)

Rick at Informed Athlete posted:

IowaMom23, is this a Division I or Division II school that offered your son?  The reason I ask is that the numbers you quoted from the coach are a mix of the Division I and Division II requirements.

By the way, D-Mac was correct on his explanation, but again the numbers don't line up as all D-1 or D-2 requirements.

This particular one was D1. Who is the best person at the school to ask? My assumption is that baseball coaches are good at baseball, financial aid people are good at financial aid. Not sure who's good at mixing the two?

Honestly, all of this is good news. I'm glad to know there is an alternative to the 3.5.

My 2018 is good at standardized tests. I think even a 105 is realistic for hm, while the 3.5 probably isn't.

My daughter, on the other hand, easily got the 3.5, but struggled to get to a 21 on her ACT. 

To exempt an academic scholarship from counting against the team limit of 11.7 scholarships in Division I, the requirements are 3.500 GPA, top 10% of the graduating class, or an ACT sumscore of 105.  

The Director of Compliance is usually the best person on campus to mix the two.  

Rick at Informed Athlete posted:

an ACT sumscore of 105.

Is that the sum score from one taking of the ACT, or can you use your best scores from different portions from different dates?

 

Iowamom23 posted:

Rick at Informed Athlete posted:

an ACT sumscore of 105.

Is that the sum score from one taking of the ACT, or can you use your best scores from different portions from different dates?

 

Good question, kind of like how some schools will super score the ACT for the best ACT composite.  If a particular college is willing to super score the ACT composite, it would make sense they'd take a "super sumscore".  

Gov posted:

 

Iowamom23 posted:

Rick at Informed Athlete posted:

an ACT sumscore of 105.

Is that the sum score from one taking of the ACT, or can you use your best scores from different portions from different dates?

 

Good question, kind of like how some schools will super score the ACT for the best ACT composite.  If a particular college is willing to super score the ACT composite, it would make sense they'd take a "super sumscore".  

I"m guessing that's maybe an NCAA decision? But maybe not. If we can combine best scores, son is at a 105. If he has to take all scores from one test, he's taking it again!

Several of the colleges we've talked to said they superscore the SAT but not the ACT. Not sure why that is or if it's the "industry-norm" but something to keep in mind.

IowaMom23, the answer is Yes.  For the purpose of NCAA eligibility requirements, as well as to be able to exempt academic aid from counting against the baseball scholarship limit, universities are permitted to take the best sub-scores from different test dates to achieve the highest possible score.  

Rick at Informed Athlete posted:

IowaMom23, the answer is Yes.  For the purpose of NCAA eligibility requirements, as well as to be able to exempt academic aid from counting against the baseball scholarship limit, universities are permitted to take the best sub-scores from different test dates to achieve the highest possible score.  

Thank you!!! I have an email into the NCAA compliance officer, just to make sure this school is consistent with that, but you've made my day — and my son's, since he can combine scores from two dates to make that magic 105.

This doesn't pertain as much to this thread but is more about the system in general.   I'm seeing a lot of student athletes in high school taking easy classes in high school just to pad their GPA's as opposed to challenging themselves, it is an unfortunate side effect (or perhaps, direct effect) of the way things are.

When a high school freshman or sophomore takes an easier math class plus Woodworking 2 or history of music as opposed to advanced calculus, simply because they are chasing academic $$$ 4-5 years down the line, that ain't good.

Good stuff here and congrats to your son, Iowa Mom.  So, is there a sum score equivalent for those who choose to take only the (new) SAT?  Thanks in advance for any responses.

Spot on 3and2.  My 2017 just learned he was turned down for a significant academic award at a school that typically offers full tuition money for ACT scores as high as 32, which he had.  When I called the office, they said the committee notes for the denial were "not enough Honors courses" and highest math was "only" Honors Pre-Calc.  I guess he must have just lucked into his high ACT score since they don't place any value on the courses he did take to enable him to get that score. That school is now no longer an option because it is a D3 and cannot offer athletic money, so the tuition cost is too great without the academic money.  He is now telling the coaches to cross him off their list.

Some of these measures like the one cited in this thread may encourage a student to focus on the easiest route to a high GPA.  I guess that may work if a kid is talented enough to get D1 athletic money and just wants to try and double dip.  But for the vast majority of high school baseball players, the athletic money will not be there.  So it is always best to focus on building the strongest case for academic money, and that means taking enough demanding classes to score very high on ACT and SAT and also make the case for academic awards by taking as many Honors and AP classes as they can.  Too late to do anything now for my 2017, but my poor 2020 daughter who hopes to swim in college is now going to be taking a full load of demanding courses.

You bring up some great points BACKSTOP22, these are difficult decisions for a 14 or 15 year old to make, on top of all the other social & athletic demands of adjusting to being an underclassman in high school.

Grades matter.  Education matters.  But then on top of that tough classes matter too.  Where do you balance that, especially when most have no clue truly at 14 or 15 if they are D1 or D3 material or even if they will play in college!?

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

Do colleges really just look at the raw GPA and give no thought to the classes behind that GPA? My guess is colleges are perfectly well aware of a kid who has As in woodshop versus AP chemistry and they weigh those grades accordingly for the program the kid plans to enter.

My daughter is a dean's list student getting zero academic aid as a diet and exercise major at a top notch college here in Iowa. My son is an okay student who likely will qualify for both academic and athletic aid while studying history at a less challenging college out of state.

It is what it is, and I refused to push them into classes they had no interest in, regardless of the potential impact (good or bad) on their GPAs. I did push them to take the top level classes they could find in the areas they cared about, and to talk to colleges to see what classes, etc., they would be looking for on applications when they got to that point. In other words, just like in baseball, where would my kid fit in and get a chance to succeed?

Most importantly, where would they be happy and where would provide a solid foundation for making a good life for themselves — not necessarily financially or socially, but a life they are comfortable with and love?

I was lucky enough to do that and that is really all I want for my children.

Great points C3G, I hear you.  I should note that while the one school did not value all of the other character-building things my 2017 did like year-round baseball, leadership and community service in their academic award decision, another school with an even better reputation in his major admitted him over many of his other classmates who had higher GPAs, and some even had higher test scores.  I'm glad that school's admissions committee was looking for kids who were better rounded and can contribute more than just book smarts in college.  So I think it will wind up better for him anyway, but it was an eye opening experience when you see how harsh it can be for both getting in, and then getting any academic money at some of these schools.  As we are all baseball-focused on this forum, getting academic money is a critical part of the college baseball equation since so few kids will get athletic money.

I completely agree with Goosegg--for some of these academic universities, they are literally looking for perfection in the high school classroom.  At least the athletes at some of these schools get some consideration in admissions that they are not going to be perfect if they spend 2-4 hours after school every day playing sports.  But  it seems it just keeps getter harder and harder for kids to get into many schools.  The UC system has completely gone bonkers with the average GPAs over 4.0 and test scores over 30 they are demanding now.  It will be interesting to see if over time this exclusivity really works out better for companies once these "perfect" students graduate and then need to collaborate and work together with others to succeed and freak out when their boss gives them something back to do over.

Ca, I feel your frustration.

In my mind, most HS teachers "teaching" a HS student at the true level of a college course is just wishful thinking; but those are the rules of the college entrance game. If you don't play that game, another family is cheering your decision because it opens a spot.

I am old enough to remember wood and auto shop. Great classes and skills were taught and acquired; but the APs didn't impact those classes - budget cuts did them in.

I think the world has changed since I was in HS (first off, dinosaurs are now extinct and we had to dodge them on the way to HS in my day) - getting into college was easier, consumer computers (and computer programming) were over the horizon, etc.  Parents (at least to me) were not nearly as engaged with their kids activities. Yes, I'd head to play baseball (with a tennis ball) in the local cul-de-sac with the neighbor kids; but, we were all doing the same basic things and not losing the race to get into college which in turn impacts your life time earnings.

Now, a greater overall percentage of the population heads to college, women are proportionately represented, kids apply to 20 schools and much of HS is a "race to nowhere" for many kids. Unfortunately, though, it seems that we need to run twice as hard to wind up in the same place!

No one forces a family to conform to the new normal; I have a sister who "unschooled" her kids and they seem to be very happy (albeit with no relevant skills).  There is something to be said for a carefree childhood - so long as the rest of the world is on the same page; if not, it's "buyer beware."

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

Bingo

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

CaCO3Girl posted:

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

"BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard? What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0? What if you want to be a gym teacher? What if you want to be a cop? What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance."

Here is the problem, IMO, with that approach: the decisions made when a kid is entering HS will foreclose certain options. How can a 14 year old who has never seen, e.g., NYC, KNOW he doesn't want to go to college in NYC? (A personal note: during our college visit trips, we visited NYC [son was a soph]. S wouldn't even roll down the car window to smell the air; didn't want to walk the streets, didn't want to take the tour. He fed off his parents trepidation of the big city. Fast forward to his soph year of college; he rued his interaction with NYC and wished he had given the school there a chance.)

By foreclosing options (by, e.g., not getting your kid to develop his potential intellectually, emotionally, physically), the parent is imposing his/her vision on the child EVEN BEFORE the child has the ability to contextualize his place in the world. There is NOTHING wrong with ANY of your views - we need teachers, police officers, mechanics - but it for the child to decide his place in the world.

As to which HS classes will have relevance, understanding which subjects have NO interest are just as important as finding subjects which have interest. (At least when I went to school, interesting classes depended totally upon the teacher rather than the subject matter.)  

Co, don't get so discouraged. This is a marathon - baseball, academics, selecting colleges, positioning your child for his best chances of success; a long process with lots of ups and downs. But, even if HS ball doesn't work for a season or two, there are paths around it; if a kid is having learning difficulty, there are paths around it. Not every kid is heading to Harvard - but every kid should be taught, driven, nudged, cajoled, begged, convinced, to fulfill their potential. And what system will accomplish that is unique to each kid - and his parent.

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

What's the opportunity?

So many times on this site people who have kids that have graduated from high school and college come back on here and say to enjoy the moment because it goes by fast.  They say you can't buy athleticism with all the lessons, and some kids just aren't D1 material, and to embrace who your kid is as a person, regardless of their baseball.  Why can't we turn that advice into academics? 

I have heard the baseball arguments and they sound the same as the AP/honors academic arguments.  He has to take AP classes so he doesn't fall behind his peers on the race to college.  He has to take AP classes when he is 14 and 15 so he can be challenged?  He needs 3 hours a week on his tutoring to maintain his skill level.

Why can't we accept our kids natural skill level in baseball and academics? What is the point in loading up a kid who wants to be a gym teacher with AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Government?  Should he take an ACT prep course, sure, should he sacrifice hundreds of hours in his high school time, where he should be enjoying his last days of being a kid, to keep up with the Jones'es, nope!

I have an MBA and put in a lot of hours in college but as my kids get older I am more and more convinced the main skill I want them to end up with in life is to be entrepreneurial.  I want them to be able to look for opportunity, take calculated chances, and work to try to succeed.  Also understand that you can work very hard and not succeed, you need to get back up and look for the next opportunity to take a chance.  Baseball teaches these lessons every time you step on the field.  

We have always pushed them to take the hardest HS classes they can but if they came to me and said they wanted to be a plumber or electrician and not go to college I would tell them to make sure they try to get in a place to open their own business. The main goal you would accomplish having them take the hardest classes possible is as others have said you give them the most choices in what they want to do.  If a 14yo knows he wants to be a cop or fireman there no reason for them to take AP Calc.

CaCO3Girl posted:

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

What's the opportunity?

So many times on this site people who have kids that have graduated from high school and college come back on here and say to enjoy the moment because it goes by fast.  They say you can't buy athleticism with all the lessons, and some kids just aren't D1 material, and to embrace who your kid is as a person, regardless of their baseball.  Why can't we turn that advice into academics? 

I have heard the baseball arguments and they sound the same as the AP/honors academic arguments.  He has to take AP classes so he doesn't fall behind his peers on the race to college.  He has to take AP classes when he is 14 and 15 so he can be challenged?  He needs 3 hours a week on his tutoring to maintain his skill level.

Why can't we accept our kids natural skill level in baseball and academics? What is the point in loading up a kid who wants to be a gym teacher with AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Government?  Should he take an ACT prep course, sure, should he sacrifice hundreds of hours in his high school time, where he should be enjoying his last days of being a kid, to keep up with the Jones'es, nope!

Every child is different. I think the point here is why limit what your child from being the best he can be, regardless if its sports or academics. I know many kids that did all the above and some, and had a terrific HS experience. I feel it is the parents job to motivate and nudge their children if required to excel. You are right that there is a balance in HS but you need to know what the right balance is for your child. Unless the child is pushed to or beyond his limits how would you ever know. I have two sons that took different paths in HS as well as college. One did not need any nudging at all and worked extremely hard in HS but also loved every minute of HS. The other needed to be nudged a bit more but we did not force anything on him. The balance of academics and sports was different but without at least exploring we would not have known. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

When you say that "Biology has no practical use", and "I will tell my kid to go load up on PE & Woodshop" that is terrible advice no matter what course he is going to take.  Additionally, "I want my kid to "hang out with his friends, instead of doing homework for four hours."  Is 4 hours of homework too much?  Probably.  However, there can be a happy medium.  I agree that kids need to be kids, but preferring your kids hang out with his friends, rather than working on his studies, is a REALLY BAD TAKE! 

If a kid is not a good student, they can still work at being a better one.  Telling your kid that it is ok to have a 2.0 is probably not sound advice.  4.0 might not be attainable, but most kids that put their minds to it, can at least get a 3.0.  Letting kids have too much free time to hang out with their friends is a potential recipe for disaster.  Why? Because kids are idiots, and they make stupid decisions.  Why? Because their KIDS!  I consider myself a pretty intelligent guy, and I did a lot of stupid things, and I make some really bad choices at times.  Why? Because I was not challenged.  School came so easy to me that I NEVER had homework, I never took an AP class (There weren't very many offered at my small school.), and school was not prioritized by my family. 

A little background.  My mother raised all 4 of us kids by herself.  (divorced at 25 with 4 small kids)  We grew up on Welfare, and education wasn't a priority.  Neither my father, mother, 2 brothers, or my sister graduated from High School!  I am the first one to go to college, graduate college (I went to school when I was 32 and graduated when I was 35.), and now I will graduate with my MBA in December of this year.)

I can tell you that I was at a huge disadvantage by not pursuing an education earlier in life, and I think we should be pushing education not pushing PE & Woodshop! 

I have spent my time raising my children with a different view than I was raised up with.  I felt that, "How can I expect my kids to value education, if I don't set an example for them?"  I am so grateful that I decided to go back to school and let my kids see the struggles of a middle class married with children guy striving to improve himself and his family by working full time and pursuing his Bachelor's & MBA.  Now when I tell them that education is important, they know that I mean business. 

I believe you are really not showing your child the importance of an education, and I stand by that wholeheartedly.  It is not going to hurt your kid to challenge himself, and PE Class is not challenging.  Wood Shop definitely has value, and I really don't have a problem with that class, just the way that you focused on it in your post.

"Why can't we accept our kids natural skill level in baseball and academics?"

If you are using the term "natural skill level" as equivalent to "potential." I agree. But, I have found that, e.g., "natural athletes" can improve their game with great instruction and "good students" can be taught to improve their study skills and time management. (I have known several pro pitchers who are not natural athletes; but hard work and perseverance got them to their goal.)

"What is the point in loading up a kid who wants to be a gym teacher with AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Government."

I have known many young teens who have life visions which changed as they moved into adulthood. If a 13 year old wants to be a cowboy, why not even drop out at 16 to head to a ranch? If a kid cannot do the work required in an AP, the kid should not be taking it; conversely, a kid who can do the work needs to be challenged - because so much of life is a challenge and the kid needs to understand that overcoming challenges is hard, hard, sometimes unpleasant work. 

"Should he take an ACT prep course, sure, should he sacrifice hundreds of hours in his high school time, where he should be enjoying his last days of being a kid, to keep up with the Jones'es, nope!"

Little Billy Jones worked his tail off, got that 1450, paired it with his astonishing community service (he worked with a food bank), rigorous course work and matching grades, wrote a great essay, and got into his dream school. Billy took his junior year abroad (China) where he learned Mandarin, had a Muslim roommate in his freshman year, and interned in different towns for a few summers.  Billy then interviewed with Teach For America (which emerged as a result of a senior thesis written at Princeton) and selected his school from amongst the most needy in Appalachia. When Billy finished his two year contract, he [had lots of options], but he decided to go back to his home community and, armed with his knowledge from Appalachia teaching, introduced some novel teaching theories at the local HS.

I know it seems overwhelming at times. And it's frustrating because it seems that you have little control or real input into the process; moreover, a kid getting pushed, cajoled and begged can be a little trying at times. All one can do is put him in the best spot so that when his motor takes over, the fewest options have been burned.

standballdad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

What's the opportunity?

So many times on this site people who have kids that have graduated from high school and college come back on here and say to enjoy the moment because it goes by fast.  They say you can't buy athleticism with all the lessons, and some kids just aren't D1 material, and to embrace who your kid is as a person, regardless of their baseball.  Why can't we turn that advice into academics? 

I have heard the baseball arguments and they sound the same as the AP/honors academic arguments.  He has to take AP classes so he doesn't fall behind his peers on the race to college.  He has to take AP classes when he is 14 and 15 so he can be challenged?  He needs 3 hours a week on his tutoring to maintain his skill level.

Why can't we accept our kids natural skill level in baseball and academics? What is the point in loading up a kid who wants to be a gym teacher with AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Government?  Should he take an ACT prep course, sure, should he sacrifice hundreds of hours in his high school time, where he should be enjoying his last days of being a kid, to keep up with the Jones'es, nope!

Every child is different. I think the point here is why limit what your child from being the best he can be, regardless if its sports or academics. I know many kids that did all the above and some, and had a terrific HS experience. I feel it is the parents job to motivate and nudge their children if required to excel. You are right that there is a balance in HS but you need to know what the right balance is for your child. Unless the child is pushed to or beyond his limits how would you ever know. I have two sons that took different paths in HS as well as college. One did not need any nudging at all and worked extremely hard in HS but also loved every minute of HS. The other needed to be nudged a bit more but we did not force anything on him. The balance of academics and sports was different but without at least exploring we would not have known. 

My son's school does a very good job at introducing various topics/activities/books/clubs/games on a wide variety on cleverly hidden academic items. If my kid was fascinated in CSI shows, doing extra math problems for fun, maybe bringing home books on Presidents and their terms; I would nudge him into any one of those AP/Honors directions. However, he would have to have an interest in learning more on a particular topic, or show that he has an innate understanding.  If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc,  I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him.  How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?

3and2Fastball posted:

This doesn't pertain as much to this thread but is more about the system in general.   I'm seeing a lot of student athletes in high school taking easy classes in high school just to pad their GPA's as opposed to challenging themselves, it is an unfortunate side effect (or perhaps, direct effect) of the way things are.

When a high school freshman or sophomore takes an easier math class plus Woodworking 2 or history of music as opposed to advanced calculus, simply because they are chasing academic $$$ 4-5 years down the line, that ain't good.

A kid from our high school went to Vanderbilt on a football ride. He had a 4.35 in high school. That's his 40 time. He was a nice kid (despite being on probation for decking a cop), but dumber than a bag of rocks. But he had a Vanderbilt qualifying gpa based on taking the easiest courses possible in high school. He lasted one semester. He transferred to another D1 and lasted one semester there. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

He/she who graduates with the most AP credits and mom's hand me down Mercedes wins.

Our high school parking lot looked like a CarMax lot for Beemers, Mercedes, Audis, Lexuses, Volvos, etc.. I'm a mean dad. I humiliated my kids by buying them 6yo Civics senior year. They did have the AP credits. They eventually bought their own Audis and Lexuses.

"If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc, I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him."

Agreed. But, I'd also try to figure out why the scores were so low: LD, poor math foundation, remedial with some tutoring, poor study skills, didn't do homework, skipped class, etc.?  If his scores equaled his potential, you can't squeeze more ; if not it's time to learn how to reach his potential.

"How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?"

No 15 yr old should be playing because a parent wants him to play; but, if it's [something] or hanging out watching CSI, then he will be playing/studying [something]. Moreover, not playing baseball is inconsequential over the next 40 years; not being able to read or do math has huge consequences.

Just make sure your kids are taking the most challenging classes that they're capable of taking.  This will change from year to year as the student and parent find out what type of student he is.  Sometimes kids on the aggressive AP track to get into a top school need to have their class work loads re-balanced, because it's stress overload.  My 2018 is almost too motivated.  He was scheduled to take 4 AP's senior year, we told him to take only 3, and have an elective that would balance out the work load.  We encouraged wood shop or an art class.  (It will be helpful for my kid to have a clue about a hammer vs just advance backhand work at SS)    

My son has been challenged and he's learned to challenge himself in the classroom.  My son is in a good position to change directions if he chooses.  He can now possibly get into a top academic with baseball as his hook, or if baseball were to disappear, he's done well enough to get into a top state school where he'll continue to thrive.

Goosegg posted:

"If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc, I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him."

Agreed. But, I'd also try to figure out why the scores were so low: LD, poor math foundation, remedial with some tutoring, poor study skills, didn't do homework, skipped class, etc.?  If his scores equaled his potential, you can't squeeze more ; if not it's time to learn how to reach his potential.

"How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?"

No 15 yr old should be playing because a parent wants him to play; but, if it's [something] or hanging out watching CSI, then he will be playing/studying [something]. Moreover, not playing baseball is inconsequential over the next 40 years; not being able to read or do math has huge consequences.

And we have circled back to what is special?  So if my kid isn't getting A's I should assume there is something wrong with him?

"I feel it is the parents job to motivate and nudge their children if required to excel."

Make sure you encourage and love your kid while nudging. My son has six close friends. Two of them are really struggling as juniors in high school with what they want to do, grades, etc. My son and another of the boys seem very settled and confident in themselves. Other two are kind of in between.

Here's what I notice — the difference seems to correlate with how their parents talk to and about them. The two who are struggling have parents who say "I can't get Johnny up in the morning. " "Johnny's too small to play at a D1 level." "Carl just has no ambition."

The kids who are doing okay have parents who say "Gosh, I love talking to my kid. He has goofy ideas sometimes, but I love hearing them. " or "It's a struggle to make those 6 a.m. workouts, but I'm so proud that he got himself up for this morning's workout." or "Yea, he doesn't know exactly what he wants to do , but here's what he's working on."

In other words, the parents who talk positively about their kids have kids who feel positively about themselves. The ones who mostly see the negatives in their kids have kids who don't feel good about themselves.

Our job as parents has to be encouraging kids to feel good about where they are heading, whether it's Vanderbilt or the local community college. Or trade school.

"we have circled back to what is special? So if my kid isn't getting A's I should assume there is something wrong with him?"

I wouldn't assume anything without knowing the facts. Those facts include speaking with the teachers to learn their opinions, going on-line daily (if your school allows it) to monitor homework assignments and grades, speaking with the school guidance counselor about possible LD issues, figuring out whether and how study habits can be improved, etc. I would seek to ascertain why the grades are not better (again, if a kid is working to his potential, that's all you can do; if not, there is a lot which can - and should - be done) do what is needed to get him engaged. (I was a terrible HS student; looking back, it was because my parents were totally unengaged - no one pushing or explaining why to do better. It took me until my junior year in college - after I had dropped out for five years - to figure it out. From that point on academics were easy. I guess it was my fault it took so long to get the motor going; but I had no clue how everything would fit together.)

In short, personally I would scratch and burrow until I was satisfied that the kid was leaving no stone unturned.  He can't do anything beyond that.

CaCO3Girl posted:

standballdad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

What's the opportunity?

So many times on this site people who have kids that have graduated from high school and college come back on here and say to enjoy the moment because it goes by fast.  They say you can't buy athleticism with all the lessons, and some kids just aren't D1 material, and to embrace who your kid is as a person, regardless of their baseball.  Why can't we turn that advice into academics? 

I have heard the baseball arguments and they sound the same as the AP/honors academic arguments.  He has to take AP classes so he doesn't fall behind his peers on the race to college.  He has to take AP classes when he is 14 and 15 so he can be challenged?  He needs 3 hours a week on his tutoring to maintain his skill level.

Why can't we accept our kids natural skill level in baseball and academics? What is the point in loading up a kid who wants to be a gym teacher with AP Calc, AP Bio, AP Government?  Should he take an ACT prep course, sure, should he sacrifice hundreds of hours in his high school time, where he should be enjoying his last days of being a kid, to keep up with the Jones'es, nope!

Every child is different. I think the point here is why limit what your child from being the best he can be, regardless if its sports or academics. I know many kids that did all the above and some, and had a terrific HS experience. I feel it is the parents job to motivate and nudge their children if required to excel. You are right that there is a balance in HS but you need to know what the right balance is for your child. Unless the child is pushed to or beyond his limits how would you ever know. I have two sons that took different paths in HS as well as college. One did not need any nudging at all and worked extremely hard in HS but also loved every minute of HS. The other needed to be nudged a bit more but we did not force anything on him. The balance of academics and sports was different but without at least exploring we would not have known. 

My son's school does a very good job at introducing various topics/activities/books/clubs/games on a wide variety on cleverly hidden academic items. If my kid was fascinated in CSI shows, doing extra math problems for fun, maybe bringing home books on Presidents and their terms; I would nudge him into any one of those AP/Honors directions. However, he would have to have an interest in learning more on a particular topic, or show that he has an innate understanding.  If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc,  I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him.  How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?

Forcing and nudging kids in HS are different. Nudging is having discussions with your child and trying to convey the pros and cons of whatever you are trying to convince them what is the best thing to do. Forcing them to do something only creates hostility. I would never leave it solely up to a HS kid to make the right choices without strong parental guidance. They will thank you later.

Iowamom23 posted:

"I feel it is the parents job to motivate and nudge their children if required to excel."

Make sure you encourage and love your kid while nudging. My son has six close friends. Two of them are really struggling as juniors in high school with what they want to do, grades, etc. My son and another of the boys seem very settled and confident in themselves. Other two are kind of in between.

Here's what I notice — the difference seems to correlate with how their parents talk to and about them. The two who are struggling have parents who say "I can't get Johnny up in the morning. " "Johnny's too small to play at a D1 level." "Carl just has no ambition."

The kids who are doing okay have parents who say "Gosh, I love talking to my kid. He has goofy ideas sometimes, but I love hearing them. " or "It's a struggle to make those 6 a.m. workouts, but I'm so proud that he got himself up for this morning's workout." or "Yea, he doesn't know exactly what he wants to do , but here's what he's working on."

In other words, the parents who talk positively about their kids have kids who feel positively about themselves. The ones who mostly see the negatives in their kids have kids who don't feel good about themselves.

Our job as parents has to be encouraging kids to feel good about where they are heading, whether it's Vanderbilt or the local community college. Or trade school.

Yes agree with what you are saying. Having a good relationship with your child makes it much easier to have those types of discussions.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc, I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him."

Agreed. But, I'd also try to figure out why the scores were so low: LD, poor math foundation, remedial with some tutoring, poor study skills, didn't do homework, skipped class, etc.?  If his scores equaled his potential, you can't squeeze more ; if not it's time to learn how to reach his potential.

"How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?"

No 15 yr old should be playing because a parent wants him to play; but, if it's [something] or hanging out watching CSI, then he will be playing/studying [something]. Moreover, not playing baseball is inconsequential over the next 40 years; not being able to read or do math has huge consequences.

And we have circled back to what is special?  So if my kid isn't getting A's I should assume there is something wrong with him?

Nobody even suggests this.  My 2016 was a B student, few A's and few C's early on while he was trying to figure out how to study.  He was challenged.  He's a freshman at Auburn electing not to play ball at Creighton.  He's happy, he's involved, he gets along with people very well, he had a B avg first semester.  He'll do well in life.  He took 2 years of wood shop - loved it.  He can fix things if he needs to...  his interest is business analytics, if he changes his mind, so what.

we challenged him, he's challenged himself, not an Ivy track, so what, that wasn't him anyway. He's on his path with lots of options.  If he kicked ass in the classroom over the next three years he'll have more options.  Up to him now.  We provided him  a life toolset.

Gov posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"If a kids math tests were 98, 92, 100; I would ask he be moved up, but if his test scores are 59, 87, 72..etc, I would not arbitrarily put him in AP Math because I thought it was what was best for him."

Agreed. But, I'd also try to figure out why the scores were so low: LD, poor math foundation, remedial with some tutoring, poor study skills, didn't do homework, skipped class, etc.?  If his scores equaled his potential, you can't squeeze more ; if not it's time to learn how to reach his potential.

"How is that different than that 15 year old playing baseball because dad wants him to play, not because he enjoys it?"

No 15 yr old should be playing because a parent wants him to play; but, if it's [something] or hanging out watching CSI, then he will be playing/studying [something]. Moreover, not playing baseball is inconsequential over the next 40 years; not being able to read or do math has huge consequences.

And we have circled back to what is special?  So if my kid isn't getting A's I should assume there is something wrong with him?

Nobody even suggests this.  My 2016 was a B student, few A's and few C's early on while he was trying to figure out how to study.  He was challenged.  He's a freshman at Auburn electing not to play ball at Creighton.  He's happy, he's involved, he gets along with people very well, he had a B avg first semester.  He'll do well in life.  He took 2 years of wood shop - loved it.  He can fix things if he needs to...  his interest is business analytics, if he changes his mind, so what.

we challenged him, he's challenged himself, not an Ivy track, so what, that wasn't him anyway. He's on his path with lots of options.  If he kicked ass in the classroom over the next three years he'll have more options.  Up to him now.  We provided him  a life toolset.

 Ugh, you had me so with you with the he's happy, he's involved, he gets along with people, he has a B average...that is a wonderful place for your kid to be in!  Then you said he would have more options if he kicked ass in the classroom over the next 3 years and you lost me.

When I graduated college one job that I applied for asked for my transcripts, ONE. It didn't matter if I had a 2.0 GPA or a 4.0 GPA, all that mattered was that I had a piece of paper saying I completed the requirements to graduate.  I didn't get that job, lol, but I have still done very well for myself.  There are always other paths, the most important thing is the degree.

I work with a lady who takes away her kids computer if he brings home less than a 90, I don't get that way of life.  So much hostility and anger in a relationship just can't be good.  Could the kid possibly have done better, maybe, is it worth the relationship with the child, I don't think so.

I sincerely believe that Academics and baseball are parallel discussions.  There is a top 1% and they are locked to get whatever they want.  But the majority of people who play baseball and go to school are in fact, by definition, average.  The amount of people who believe their children MUST enroll in honors and AP courses to attend college is staggering. I just didn't want this thread to perpetuate that rumor.

"When I graduated college one job that I applied for asked for my transcripts, ONE. It didn't matter if I had a 2.0 GPA or a 4.0 GPA, all that mattered was that I had a piece of paper saying I completed the requirements to graduate. I didn't get that job, lol, but I have still done very well for myself. There are always other paths, the most important thing is the degree."

I have (had) two kids in a great school; I have neices and nephews who graduated from state schools near the top of their class; my wife and I finished back in the day near the top of our grad school classes (one state, one private). Now, maybe because of the school, the employers, or the ranking, but every one of my interviews, my wife's interviews, my kids interviews (for internships and for real jobs), my neices and nephews interviews involved passing the first "cut" - which was totally based upon a piece of paper. That paper had work experience and grades; heck many employers won't even interview unless you're in at least a certain section of the class.

Now, as a businessman who hired essentially unskilled workers for 25 years, a resume and/or transcript was worthless - I used my gut and an interview to do the first cut.

The difference is I pay minimum wage and all those referenced above got a bit more. 

Let me ask you this (no need to answer if it's too personal): is this your oldest boy?

Goosegg posted:

"When I graduated college one job that I applied for asked for my transcripts, ONE. It didn't matter if I had a 2.0 GPA or a 4.0 GPA, all that mattered was that I had a piece of paper saying I completed the requirements to graduate. I didn't get that job, lol, but I have still done very well for myself. There are always other paths, the most important thing is the degree."

I have (had) two kids in a great school; I have neices and nephews who graduated from state schools near the top of their class; my wife and I finished back in the day near the top of our grad school classes (one state, one private). Now, maybe because of the school, the employers, or the ranking, but every one of my interviews, my wife's interviews, my kids interviews (for internships and for real jobs), my neices and nephews interviews involved passing the first "cut" - which was totally based upon a piece of paper. That paper had work experience and grades; heck many employers won't even interview unless you're in at least a certain section of the class.

Now, as a businessman who hired essentially unskilled workers for 25 years, a resume and/or transcript was worthless - I used my gut and an interview to do the first cut.

The difference is I pay minimum wage and all those referenced above got a bit more. 

Let me ask you this (no need to answer if it's too personal): is this your oldest boy?

 

Yes, this is my oldest boy.

Also, I'm really confused.  I have worked in 3 states, at jobs that paid 1.5-6X minimum wage, interviewed maybe 10 times in my life, over 20 years, and only when I interviewed for a government job did someone ask me for a transcript.  Weird how different our experiences were.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"When I graduated college one job that I applied for asked for my transcripts, ONE. It didn't matter if I had a 2.0 GPA or a 4.0 GPA, all that mattered was that I had a piece of paper saying I completed the requirements to graduate. I didn't get that job, lol, but I have still done very well for myself. There are always other paths, the most important thing is the degree."

I have (had) two kids in a great school; I have neices and nephews who graduated from state schools near the top of their class; my wife and I finished back in the day near the top of our grad school classes (one state, one private). Now, maybe because of the school, the employers, or the ranking, but every one of my interviews, my wife's interviews, my kids interviews (for internships and for real jobs), my neices and nephews interviews involved passing the first "cut" - which was totally based upon a piece of paper. That paper had work experience and grades; heck many employers won't even interview unless you're in at least a certain section of the class.

Now, as a businessman who hired essentially unskilled workers for 25 years, a resume and/or transcript was worthless - I used my gut and an interview to do the first cut.

The difference is I pay minimum wage and all those referenced above got a bit more. 

Let me ask you this (no need to answer if it's too personal): is this your oldest boy?

 

Yes, this is my oldest boy.

Also, I'm really confused.  I have worked in 3 states, at jobs that paid 1.5-6X minimum wage, interviewed maybe 10 times in my life, over 20 years, and only when I interviewed for a government job did someone ask me for a transcript.  Weird how different our experiences were.

Had one employer look at my resume and mildly freak out that I had a master's degree. He was intimidated that I had more education than he did. But no one has ever asked for my grades, they just wanted to know that I graduated.

Re resumes:

• Resumes are designed to sell the candidate. Each resume (as opposed to a job application) will highlight the candidate's strengths (not weaknesses); if a resume contains "holes" (e.g., a year spent in jail would show up as a missing year when the resume is broken down), the holes stand out to people who are accustomed to reading and analyzing resumes. Missing information (e.g., grades when most resumes contain grades) will always be assumed to lean against the candidate.
• As a person acquires work experience, their college stats become less important; at some point performance in college/grad school becomes irrelevant as work experience demonstrates competency.
• when I was an interviewer for jobs which were extremely well paid (for recent law school grads), kids with good grades/ranks put that right at the top; any resume missing this was a red flag - no one got through the first cut without that.
• when I actually hired (and paid essentially out of my pocket since I owned the biz) people during the depths of the recession, I would get Masters degrees looking for an unskilled minimum wage job; that was good enough for me - the worst well educated person was generally better than a HS grad for our needs.
• as my kids moved through college, each would send the resume home for proof reading. One thing that struck me was - for internships early in college - their HS stats were included. I would object that HS was irrelevant to a college job; was overruled by the career services office - who we accepted as experts in employment issues for that college.
• when applying for several SBA loans, the bank required a detailed resume of the owners; the bank wanted to know not only from where you graduated, but also how well you did (expressed in GPA, honors, awards, whatever) (interestingly, this was never a requirement for regular commercial loans)
• as my kids moved into real permanent jobs, we proofed each resume. No HS stats; but overall GPA, individual classes (with grades), honors and awards were right at the top. Essentially a candidate was demonstrating competence in an area which was important to the employer - competence was reflected in a grade. 
• strong candidates have lots of selling points; "beating" your competition is one - which is expressed through better results (generally) in head to head competition (grades).
• the less well paid the job, the fewer potential employees (absent a huge recession). The less well paid the job, generally, the cheaper it is to train an employee. Therefore, there is less monetary risk in a shallower pool for an employer - hence college performance isn't that important. The higher paid the job, the more competition. The higher paid the job, the more monetary expense there is to the employer to train (and even relocate) the employee (generally). With more on the line, the more competition, the more important the objective measures become; early in the working career, those objective measures are college performance.

As we discuss resumes, we actually may be saying the same thing: for some jobs grades/school matter; for others not so much. The point is how does a parent of HS freshman know which will be important in a decade; the least risky approach is to get to the top of the "pyramid" and then have the choice to work anywhere.

Goosegg,  I had a big long reply typed out about how your world and mine must be vastly different in how and why we hire people, but I'll just leave it with "I will report back in 10 years and let you know how it goes".

I never had anyone ask for a transcript and I don't remember ever talking about grades in an interview.  I remember that Merrill Lynch made me take some tests in one phase of interviews.    

9and7dad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

rynoattack posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

That is a really bad take.  Biology has quite a bit of value in the real world.  My brother in law received his Bachelor's in Biology, which allowed him entry into Dental School.  He is now an Endodontist, and he will far surpass my salary - Business Admin., soon to complete my MBA.  He will soon be a millionaire, and I will still be "working for the man".

Telling your kid to take woodshop and PE is not good advice. He needs to be challenged, and he will be thankful later.

I said AP Biology is only helpful if you plan on pursing biology, if you want to be a Dr. then by all means take AP bio, take honors government, take Calc II because you have the type of brain that needs to be challenged. 

BUT, what if you don't want to go to Harvard?  What if you want to stay close to home and go to the local college that admits people with a 2.0?  What if you want to be a gym teacher?  What if you want to be a cop?  What if you want to pursue a career and path in life where AP Bio will have no relevance.

Why can't parents in this generation accept that not all of our children are "special"? Honors and AP classes were created for the kids who wanted to explore particular subjects more in depth.  Created for students that had a passion about a particular subject, they were not created for the masses.  Do ALL of our children have to be so special they ALL must take honors and AP courses? 

I think it's as simple as how you, and your child, define success.  The problem is that by not striving to maximize opportunity while still in high school, doors start to close and the definition of success is defined for you, not by you.

Holy Smokes Nuke!  During this entire conversation over several days, I've been thinking of that scene.  I've probably played it in my head a dozen times this week.  Ted Knight (RIP) could read the phone book and I'd probably laugh.  Too funny.

decent article on grades and jobs. moral: it depends on a lot of factors.

https://www.cleverism.com/gpa-matter-applying-job/

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

As I read through this post,  with these off the cuff remarks and back and forth jabs, I thought I was on Facebook.  

If you are in HS, you are a few years away from being a legal adult in this country.  IMO, as a parent, and not as my kid's best friend, I would want to challenge him.  Push him to be better. I wouldn't want him to hang out at the mall or play video games for 4 hours. Can he succeed at the next academic level?  Then take Honors or AP courses, don't settle for an easy grade.  This teaches him work ethic which will be valuable in baseball as well as in life.

If you are okay with your kid aspiring to be a gym teacher or work in construction than so be it, have him load up on Phys Ed and Wood Shop.  It seems you find fixing the mail box more important than understanding the human body, whether it is in an AP or a regular bio class.

Nothing wrong with a gym teacher or to work in construction, but don't expect 6 figure salaries and the same chances in life as others that have applied themselves.  

Wait... Hmm, I just described millennials.  Young adults now a days that feel they are entitled to everything even though they haven't put in any work. Lol.

JYNY posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

As I read through this post,  with these off the cuff remarks and back and forth jabs, I thought I was on Facebook.  

If you are in HS, you are a few years away from being a legal adult in this country.  IMO, as a parent, and not as my kid's best friend, I would want to challenge him.  Push him to be better. I wouldn't want him to hang out at the mall or play video games for 4 hours. Can he succeed at the next academic level?  Then take Honors or AP courses, don't settle for an easy grade.  This teaches him work ethic which will be valuable in baseball as well as in life.

If you are okay with your kid aspiring to be a gym teacher or work in construction than so be it, have him load up on Phys Ed and Wood Shop.  It seems you find fixing the mail box more important than understanding the human body, whether it is in an AP or a regular bio class.

Nothing wrong with a gym teacher or to work in construction, but don't expect 6 figure salaries and the same chances in life as others that have applied themselves.  

Wait... Hmm, I just described millennials.  Young adults now a days that feel they are entitled to everything even though they haven't put in any work. Lol.

I think the problem with milennials are the parents.  

Unless your kid was born with God given ability he's not likely to throw 95, earn 6 figures, or get straight A's. An entire generation of parents are saying ANYTHING is possible if you just work at it...it's not. 

There are special people, but not everyone is special.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

"When I graduated college one job that I applied for asked for my transcripts, ONE. It didn't matter if I had a 2.0 GPA or a 4.0 GPA, all that mattered was that I had a piece of paper saying I completed the requirements to graduate. I didn't get that job, lol, but I have still done very well for myself. There are always other paths, the most important thing is the degree."

I have (had) two kids in a great school; I have neices and nephews who graduated from state schools near the top of their class; my wife and I finished back in the day near the top of our grad school classes (one state, one private). Now, maybe because of the school, the employers, or the ranking, but every one of my interviews, my wife's interviews, my kids interviews (for internships and for real jobs), my neices and nephews interviews involved passing the first "cut" - which was totally based upon a piece of paper. That paper had work experience and grades; heck many employers won't even interview unless you're in at least a certain section of the class.

Now, as a businessman who hired essentially unskilled workers for 25 years, a resume and/or transcript was worthless - I used my gut and an interview to do the first cut.

The difference is I pay minimum wage and all those referenced above got a bit more. 

Let me ask you this (no need to answer if it's too personal): is this your oldest boy?

 

Yes, this is my oldest boy.

Also, I'm really confused.  I have worked in 3 states, at jobs that paid 1.5-6X minimum wage, interviewed maybe 10 times in my life, over 20 years, and only when I interviewed for a government job did someone ask me for a transcript.  Weird how different our experiences were.

Yes, the Federal Government (which I worked for 15 years) did ask for my transcripts, especially if it is a specific degree that qualified you for a position. Don't know if it is still the case, but the Federal government had what was called "SAA", Superior Academic Achievement which could give one a higher "entry level " grade with a Bachelor's degree if you met one of several criteria (specific rank in class, specific overall GPA, specific GPA in major).

d-mac posted:

I never had anyone ask for a transcript and I don't remember ever talking about grades in an interview.  I remember that Merrill Lynch made me take some tests in one phase of interviews.    

Coming out of college I was asked gpa and major. The companies I interviewed with were consistent with this request. The company that hired me requested a copy of my transcripts stamped approved for graduation. 

After the first job I was never asked again. My first job was a company others liked to loot for employees. With the second job it was about production which is easily proven in sales plus your reputation on the street. I was recruited to my second job. I left when the first employer purchased them. 

CaCO3Girl posted:

JYNY posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Goosegg posted:

It is no secret that the tippy top schools require: near perfect grades, the MOST rigorous cirriculum offered at that HS, and top scores. (Not to fret if your HS doesn't offer 30 AP's; the measure is the hardest courses offered at your HS.)

During our tours, a constant question went something like this: "should I take an AP and make a B, or an honors class and make an A?"  The constant answer was: "take the AP and make an A." 

I have read all of this thread and I have to say it stinks. Let me be the bad guy and say I'd rather my kid play a sport, hang out with his friends and BE A KID than do 4 hours of homework a night so he can take the honors and AP courses and have a "challenging" schedule.  You know what is challenging?  Being a kid in a society that wants them all to be little grown ups.

Off to tell my kid to load up on Phys ed and Wood Shop....both of which will serve him FAR better in the future than AP Bio, which has no practical use in the real world unless you plan on pursing Biology.  I took AP Bio, I can't figure out how to fix the mail box, wood shop would have been handy right around now.

As I read through this post,  with these off the cuff remarks and back and forth jabs, I thought I was on Facebook.  

If you are in HS, you are a few years away from being a legal adult in this country.  IMO, as a parent, and not as my kid's best friend, I would want to challenge him.  Push him to be better. I wouldn't want him to hang out at the mall or play video games for 4 hours. Can he succeed at the next academic level?  Then take Honors or AP courses, don't settle for an easy grade.  This teaches him work ethic which will be valuable in baseball as well as in life.

If you are okay with your kid aspiring to be a gym teacher or work in construction than so be it, have him load up on Phys Ed and Wood Shop.  It seems you find fixing the mail box more important than understanding the human body, whether it is in an AP or a regular bio class.

Nothing wrong with a gym teacher or to work in construction, but don't expect 6 figure salaries and the same chances in life as others that have applied themselves.  

Wait... Hmm, I just described millennials.  Young adults now a days that feel they are entitled to everything even though they haven't put in any work. Lol.

I think the problem with milennials are the parents.  

Unless your kid was born with God given ability he's not likely to throw 95, earn 6 figures, or get straight A's. An entire generation of parents are saying ANYTHING is possible if you just work at it...it's not. 

There are special people, but not everyone is special.

The 95mph pitch is tied more to physical capability.  Straight A's in HS are very difficult and not likely.  Straight A's don't define a kids trajectory in life, constantly challenging a kid and the kid accepting those challenges will help a kid prepare for his future.  Plenty of B and C students turning into A students when they get to college because they start understanding it's like a job: show up, apply yourself, and manage your time.   Constantly challenging a kid will help him become stronger.  As parent we're trying offer guidance to give our children options when graduate from high school and college.  We're also monitoring our kids to avoid systems overload. 

Anybody is capable of earning 6 figures.  It's about committing to a plan and being prepared when opportunities present themselves, whether it's getting on board a young company, getting experience at whatever company then launching your own business, or putting in the time at one good company.  Making 6 figures is also not the end all, plenty of people handcuffed to organizations where they are miserable everyday but they still cash the check.  

Always learning, continually being prepared so that we're in a strong position, great country we live in, reach for the stars, you never know.