3 ms·
I don't know... I went to a very competitive public high school in an affluent suburb. In most of my friend groups (self-segregated based on taking honors and A
by kfajdsl 4y ago
I don't know... I went to a very competitive public high school in an affluent suburb. In most of my friend groups (self-segregated based on taking honors and APs), most people got at least above a 1450 on the SAT or maybe 32 on the ACT. At the end of the day we were taking Calc II (AP Calculus BC) when the highest math on either exam is the very beginnings of trigonometry.
EDIT: Many did take the exam 2 or 3 times, until they got a score they were satisfied with.
We still partied, drank, played a fuck ton of video games, generally did stupid shit, normal teenager things. This was largely the case in neighboring schools as well (the Atlanta northern sprawl is very large).
I'm not saying we didn't have parental involvement; we absolutely did. They had the resources and investment in our education to push us along that path. Our school also had a lot of resources. But it wasn't prison.
I'm not sure if it was the parental involvement and their expectations or the resources and quality of education at our affluent school. Most likely both. Whatever it is, I think it's a travesty that it isn't the norm everywhere to have an opportunity for that kind of education. There is so much wasted potential in this country.
- yamtaddle 4y agoSchools and even individual classes in a school can skew "smart", probably for some combination of chance and socio-economic circumstances. My (public) high school class was commented on from grade school as being remarkably bright. But about 3/4 the bright kids were lazy as fuck and got terrible grades (myself included—and I don't mean the try-hard version of terrible grades like "oh no I got one b-", I mean Cs and Ds not being uncommon)—but then killed on standardized tests, 95+ percentile, very certainly not due to application of remarkable effort or even trying all that hard.