3 ms·
I agree that competitive college admissions are a driver of "helicopter parenting". However, from what I've seen, that behavior doesn't work nearly as well as y
by dcposch 11y ago
I agree that competitive college admissions are a driver of "helicopter parenting". However, from what I've seen, that behavior doesn't work nearly as well as you imply.
I'm lucky to have great parents. Not "helicopter" by any stretch. I was just a nerd in high school: I took nine APs, went to science fairs, did an engineering internship, & was on the math team. I never took test prep classes, took the SAT and ACT only once, and I wrote & edited the application by myself. It worked. I went to Stanford, class of 2012.
What I did have were some really excellent HS teachers esp in STEM subjects & supportive parents who gave me a lot of freedom. I had some peers whose parents kept pushing them & who burned out.
By contrast, I had fun & felt free both in high school and at Stanford.
Aggressive parent involvement may help some people get into a good college, but it's certainly not necessary & is often harmful.
Your last sentence is especially wrong. Micromanaging your near-adult children and refusing to "let them be human beings" is bad advice. Your children should be driven by their own ambition, not yours.
- xlm1717 11y ago>supportive parents who gave me a lot of freedom This is the difference between successful students and students who crumble when they get a B. Parents insist on getting their children in the very best universities, when cheaper options like state universities or local colleges are viable alternatives. They push students who are not intrinsically motivated, and when these students leave their parents and go to college, they are completely lost.