...a few stanford parents calling an assistant dean to complain are not evidence of a ruining of a generation. And that was the title of the article. That's truly the tail, and it's not wagging the dog.
We are living in the greatest time ever in human history.
But I appreciate your view.
With my thumb and fore finger pinching my nose, "Go Royals".
...a few stanford parents calling an assistant dean to complain are not evidence of a ruining of a generation. And that was the title of the article. That's truly the tail, and it's not wagging the dog.
We are living in the greatest time ever in human history.
But I appreciate your view.
With my thumb and fore finger pinching my nose, "Go Royals".
that's not her evidence base. Though the interview doesn't reproduce the stats, it does make reference to them:
She cites reams of statistics on the rise of depression and other mental and emotional health problems among the nation’s young people.
Believe me there is a real problem here and MANY informed people are concerned.
I'm just skeptical anytime anybody yells crisis, then backs it up with anecdotal third party stories. It's easy to be a pessimist. The media loves stories about how bad things are now, and how good things used to be. So helicopter parents are ruining a generation? Who's to say the current generation of kids aren't the happiest ever?
As the Rolling Stones said, "Hey! You! Get off of my cloud!"
Julie is writing from the perspective of the former Freshman Dean of Students and her first hand experience with a number of them, and their parents. As I referenced above and posted in a similar earlier thread on the HSBBW, we have a suicide cluster of extremely high achieving HS students in our area. Most have walked on the tracks and stood in front of a speeding commuter train.
I don't think most of what Julie is speaking to would properly be referenced as "Anecdotal third party stories?" Julie is writing and speaking mostly from her personal interactions at Stanford.
During the course of the discussion, information came from one student source who wanted his Dad to stop..."providing him daily updates on his chances and odds of admission to Stanford, Harvard, and Yale." Daily updates and updated odds and chances were making him anxious, upset and completely turned off to the message and especially to his Dad. Not much third party at all in much of what I know about Julie and her perspectives.
I think Rob T's post captures some of what Julie is referencing and does it so vividly. No one is saying this is a one size fits all.
infield and slugger,
I'm not denying there are issues, but "ruining a generation" is absurd. Our kids are growing up in the best time ever in human history.
There's a really interesting book called, "The Happiness Advantage" that examines, among other things, the neuroscience behind what's happening in the brains of people who report being happy (or not). One telling anecdote is about a study done of newly admitted Harvard freshmen. They were surveyed after acceptance (but before matriculation) about their happiness and satisfaction levels, and again after the end of their first semester. As you might guess, happiness levels started sky high and then plummeted. To get into Harvard, these kids had never been anything but first in their class, all-everything, kings and queens of their secondary schools, and they had gotten into HARVARD. After a semester, half of them were below average and someone was last in the class.
It surprises me not at all that schools like Stanford and Harvard see astronomical rates of depression among their student body, freshmen in particular. I have no doubt that there are Helicopter, Curling, and Lawnmower parents to share the blame. And there are probably more of them than in previous generations because of the American Dream becoming further out of reach, more immigration from countries with higher expectations of their children, etc. But I think "ruining a generation" is a bit over the top, although the article will get more reads with that headline. I'm pretty impressed with the young people I know and the ones I read about. Most of these kids are well aware that there is no single "brass ring"; shame on those parents and counselors who try to convince them there is.
There's a really interesting book called, "The Happiness Advantage" that examines, among other things, the neuroscience behind what's happening in the brains of people who report being happy (or not). One telling anecdote is about a study done of newly admitted Harvard freshmen. They were surveyed after acceptance (but before matriculation) about their happiness and satisfaction levels, and again after the end of their first semester. As you might guess, happiness levels started sky high and then plummeted. To get into Harvard, these kids had never been anything but first in their class, all-everything, kings and queens of their secondary schools, and they had gotten into HARVARD. After a semester, half of them were below average and someone was last in the class.
It surprises me not at all that schools like Stanford and Harvard see astronomical rates of depression among their student body, freshmen in particular. I have no doubt that there are Helicopter, Curling, and Lawnmower parents to share the blame. And there are probably more of them than in previous generations because of the American Dream becoming further out of reach, more immigration from countries with higher expectations of their children, etc. But I think "ruining a generation" is a bit over the top, although the article will get more reads with that headline. I'm pretty impressed with the young people I know and the ones I read about. Most of these kids are well aware that there is no single "brass ring"; shame on those parents and counselors who try to convince them there is.
Excellent post.
There's a new and growing field of psychology called affective forecasting. In general, people are very, very bad at knowing what will make them happy in the future. So a student prior getting into Harvard, predicting how happy they will be once they do get into Harvard, will often turn out to be way off base. In general, humans tend to significantly overestimate how happy getting what they most want will make them.
On another note, headline writers are paid to write headlines that attract readers, not necessarily headlines that accurately reflect the content of the relevant article.
The mismatch between headline and content can sometimes be amazing.
Still, I stand by the point that the former dean knows whereof she speaks.
2020dad, I think you an I grew up much in a similar environment with many of the same experiences. Me?... steel mill town going silent with devastating affect on the community. You are clearly doing some remarkable things with the successes your kids are having. I know you are a strong believer in "live and let live". I know you are set on your principals and don't like to be told that anything different may hold some value to you. I kinda get your thought process and agree with a lot of things you say. But I am going to present a few thoughts for consideration....
You quoted a few things that you largely live by...
"everything you need to know in life can be learned from the godfather "I lived my life, and I don't apologize, to take care of my family" If its good enough for Vito Corleone then its good enough for me! "
Well, for one, the godfather lived his life and acquired his fortunes largely via guiltless murdering of others. Just maybe he took the "take care of your own" mantra too far? (OK, maybe a bit dramatic. Stay with me. I will add, however, that my steel mill town was also a mafia town so I'm not completely "unfamiliar".)
and...
"What was the line of wyatt earps (too lazy to look up spelling) father "blood is blood and everybody else is just a stranger". "
I just finished a lengthy program focused on budgeting and building wealth. Toward the end, the speaker threw out several case studies that focused on what makes wealthy people the most happy. These were well documented numbers and information I had heard many times before. Yes, it is important that they gain financial security for their family. But the thing that makes them most happy is the ability to turn around and give back to strangers who are in need...
I agree with Sluggerdad's quote...
"You're reading her (and the Harvard article if you read it) the wrong way, I think. The intended message is not "stay where you are." It's not telling you or your kids not to work hard."
I think, similarly, you read us the wrong way when we state how difficult it is to make it into a college baseball program. We don't want readers to fold up tent and stay where they are. We want them to go full speed ahead, armed with the information they need and the realization that it will take serious effort and focus of purpose.
Nice post cabbagedad.
a thought on where she is coming from to get that perspective...
A good friend of mine was the chancellor at a nearby college, and he and I would get together for lunch every 3 or 4 months. Our conversations usually started with me asking "how many"... he always knew exactly what I was asking. He would pause to collect himself before telling me how many parents he'd now had to call to break the news that their entire world had just committed suicide on his watch. He had a pretty rough time at my school, but nothing affected him like that. It was a crushing responsibility.
hitting a round ball with a round bat is easy compared to that...
Thanks 2020, yeah, of course the godfather comment was meant with some degree of tongue-in-cheek humor. I did not pick up on any comment from you earlier in the thread that addressed the charitable aspect. So, I went back and looked and sure enough, I had misread a statement you made in that regard.
___________________________
Ice cream every day???? 
When I was growing up, wheat germ on our sugarless cereal was dad's idea of a treat.
And today he'd be arrested for child abuse for feeding his kids gluten 
I don't see it that she says Harvard/Stanford is good for her but not others.
She laments the trend of kids going through life stuck living their parents' dreams, and warns of the preponderance of parents who are fighting kid's battles, writing their papers and basically never allowing them to grow up a learn to stand on their own two feet. I am sure she got a bit sick of seeing these great looking applicants show up on campus looking nothing like the confident and independent young adult that their admissions essay painted them to be.
A kid who can't speak for his or her self (admissions essay), communicate effectively (term papers), manage their own time (getting homework completed) is going to have a very, very tough time in life. In fact, they may be better off in the long run if they struggle and get into "Ole State U." than are handheld into Vandy.
Top-tier schools can be great, but get in there on your own merit and go because you want to and not because mom and dad want the bumper-sticker.
In summary, I would imagine that the author had to earn her own way into Stanford and Harvard. She supports those who do likewise and discourages those who are being dragged along on their parents' coattails.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
This observation from the article jumped out at me:
Check your language. “If you say ‘we’ when you mean your son or your daughter — as in, ‘We’re on the travel soccer team’ — it’s a hint to yourself that you are intertwined in a way that is unhealthy.”
A whole lot of parents here do this. And while I'd edit the statement to say it's a hint that you may be intertwined in a way that is unhealthy -- it's still interesting.
It's also an expression HSBBW parents whose sons are in college or higher seldom use.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
Teaching elder, stories don't get any more anecdotal than above.
This observation from the article jumped out at me:
Check your language. “If you say ‘we’ when you mean your son or your daughter — as in, ‘We’re on the travel soccer team’ — it’s a hint to yourself that you are intertwined in a way that is unhealthy.”
A whole lot of parents here do this. And while I'd edit the statement to say it's a hint that you may be intertwined in a way that is unhealthy -- it's still interesting.
It's also an expression HSBBW parents whose sons are in college or higher seldom use.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
Teaching elder, stories don't get any more anecdotal than above.
Okay. Then what is it that you would like?
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
Teaching elder, stories don't get any more anecdotal than above.
Okay. Then what is it that you would like?
Facts, something other than a made up story about johnny at little league or that "a whole generation is ruined by parents" story by an assistant dean at Stanford based on her view of incoming Stanford freshman.
We live in the greatest time ever for humans on earth. We are happier, healthier, richer, have more leisure time and a longer life expectancy than anytime in history.
Here an example: An average american retires at 62. A hundred years ago the average american died at 51.
Well...since you mentioned elitist. I see where you decry elitism in the case of the author's personality, but in other places you have stated that you essentially are striving for elitism yourself. You want to be the rich guy. You say "Money does buy happiness." You want to provide perks for your kids that others don't necessarily get, e.g., respect for money and knowledge of how to get and hold money. You also want your kids one day to be sitting around the table after golf complaining about how bad it is to own the business... like the elitists do. I am a bit curious as to how you justify the two contrary positions.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
I saw a car commercial last night, kid was maybe 8 or 9, dad is walking his little football player back to the car thinking in his head "Participant, why does the trophy say participant, his team beat all the other teams, why does he HAVE to get the same trophy as everyone else?"
Father flicked off the plate that said "participant" and wrote in black sharpie "CHAMPS"
This observation from the article jumped out at me:
Check your language. “If you say ‘we’ when you mean your son or your daughter — as in, ‘We’re on the travel soccer team’ — it’s a hint to yourself that you are intertwined in a way that is unhealthy.”
A whole lot of parents here do this. And while I'd edit the statement to say it's a hint that you may be intertwined in a way that is unhealthy -- it's still interesting.
It's also an expression HSBBW parents whose sons are in college or higher seldom use.
Now THAT's elitist.
But i don't see where you get that her views are elitist. Seems like a projection of some issue of yours onto her and a pretty unfair projection at that.
+1
The issues in modern American society are a little more than anecdotal, as someone has suggested. Parents vicariously living through kids is "crampant" as Chickenman would say.
We have little leagues where a kid who throws 40 isn't allowed to play because he's too fast and other kids get their feelings hurt because they aren't successful. The problem is not the kids and their feelings getting hurt. They get over it. Just like we did. The problem is the parents and grandparents and their feelings getting hurt. Junior strikes out every time and sad mommy and grandma tell him he's wonderful and can be whatever he wants to be. Junior needs to hear the truth a little more.
Teaching elder, stories don't get any more anecdotal than above.
Okay. Then what is it that you would like?
Facts, something other than a made up story about johnny at little league or that "a whole generation is ruined by parents" story by an assistant dean at Stanford based on her view of incoming Stanford freshman.
We live in the greatest time ever for humans on earth. We are happier, healthier, richer, have more leisure time and a longer life expectancy than anytime in history.
Here an example: An average american retires at 62. A hundred years ago the average american died at 51.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...-kids_n_3472719.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4556...-young/#.VjO8Uy-FPIU
http://www.askcoachwolff.com/2...concern-and-growing/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.../03/100310083443.htm
http://www.athleticbusiness.co...ning-popularity.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/.../06/schools.children
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...o-much-pressure.html
This one ought to give you a great primer on the growth of parental oppressiveness. Hint, it started in the 1960s with the Self-Esteem movement.
http://www.theatlantic.com/edu...an-childhood/279868/
.
Here are a few articles for you to look at. But, I would not be so quick to just casually sweep away the ever increasing reports by school administrators, sports coaches, psychologists and even orthopedic surgeons telling us that there are a lot of parents out there who are just ridiculous. They are in positions to observe and experience not only numerous cases, but to also get a sense of various changes that have occured over time. They are in a very good position to offer far more than anecdotal thoughts.
You can't tell me you haven't run across this change yourself. Yesterday's parent at the Little League game whom the other parents sort of laughed at with others behind their back are today's common parent.
P.s.
As to children today being the happiest generation, the matter is highly debatable.
Ok TE, you win. I'm unplugging. I'm selling my house, pulling my kids out of school and going to live off the grid in the desert. No more school, sports, band, ipads, cell phones for my kids. Too much pressure. Going to drink from the spring and hunt my food. No more immunizations, doctors and that crazy stuff. Also going to liquidate my retirement, give it to Huffington Post b/c they tell it straight.
Guess what I'm really wishing for is the good old days when all I had to worry about was my kids getting polio or influenza, starving, wife dying from child birth, war, infant mortality and all the simple things in life. Ahh the good old days.
Well...since you mentioned elitist. I see where you decry elitism in the case of the author's personality, but in other places you have stated that you essentially are striving for elitism yourself. You want to be the rich guy. You say "Money does buy happiness." You want to provide perks for your kids that others don't necessarily get, e.g., respect for money and knowledge of how to get and hold money. You also want your kids one day to be sitting around the table after golf complaining about how bad it is to own the business... like the elitists do. I am a bit curious as to how you justify the two contrary positions.
