[Kathy]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=12948.msg131267#msg131267 date=1443388834]
I wholeheartedly agree with Julie's critique of helicopter parenting and the need for young adults to learn to take control of their own success.

But it is almost farcically naive in the stressful, complex world created by elite admissions processes.  The competition to get into schools like Stanford is so high that only students with elaborate support structures have a ghost of a chance.  I would bet that more than 90% of the entering students at elite institutions had parents who did at least one of these things: paid for extra college counseling; paid for SAT training; paid for lessons or memberships in extracurricular activities designed to enhance the application; paid for study abroad opportunities; use personal connections to arrange for summer internships; paid for travel expenses for college visits and interviews.  The numbers of students who could figure out how to do all of this by themselves without parental helicoptering is tiny.  Very few if any of these things would have been done a couple of generations ago when I was an applicant, and so it is the ramped-up competition driven by admissions offices that has helped to create helicopter parents.  Parents become personal-trainers preparing their kids for the brutal world of college admissions--a role that some of them apparently cannot set aside after college begins for their kids

All these books talking about getting away from intrusive parenting and emphasizing the need for young people to individuate and learn personal responsibility are correct in their goals; I do not think, however, that they truly understand the causes of the cultural shift that has produced this unhealthy environment. 

Now, let's say that Stanford decided to only admit students who have taken a year off after high school for national service of some sort, or to work at a job.  Let's say that it sharply limited the volume of extracurriculars, test scores, AP courses, etc. that can be on an application.  Let's say that it set a standard for admissions--high--but then randomly chose from all among all applicants who met the standard.  Let's say that it entered into a consortium with the Ivies and other elites and they all did the same.  Why then you might find a lot of helicopter crashes.

I think you're ignoring a vital point.  This (parents behavior) doesn't start out of the blue in middle school, it starts at birth.  Two generations of families have been influenced by what I consider a disservice from some (many?) childhood and psychology "experts" who, among other things, instructed parents to not say no to children, to avoid competition where there was a possibility of failure, to over-compensate for weaknesses and failings, to instilling in their children that they can do anything they want to do, have anything they want to have, because they are "special."  My wife and I witnessed it when our son was under one year old and we lived at Escondido Village, along with many grad students at the School of Education.  Some of the things we were subtly reprimanded for were ridiculous, in our opinion, including not hosting a birthday party fit for Elvis when he turned one.  Poor thing, missed out on professional clowns, catered meals, elaborate birthday cakes.  The horror.  He also suffered through pre-school, kindergarten, grade school, middle school and high school graduations without a personal limo in sight.  Once, at Escondido Village, a grad student chastised us that he didn't have enough toys and was lacking in stimulation.  His favorite toys were mommy' wooden spoons and mixing bowls (later he graduated to preferring the boxes toys came in to the toys themselves) and his stimulation came for being read to, sung to, and, most importantly, talked to incessantly.  And over the years we watched those kids with the toys and limos grow into sniveling, spoiled, entitled kids.  Then they tried to out do their parents when it came time to raise their own.  The stated reason, almost every time?  We want him/her to know they are special.  After 18 years of this why would anyone expect it to change when they turn 19?  After all, they might get angry if mom and dad weren't constantly there.  Every one of you who are parents know that a gentle, sudden slap on a well-padded bottom, along with a harsh No! goes along way towards developing a happy, productive member of society.  And isn't that the point?

I'll probably delete this later because it is too old fartish.
[/quote]

From one old fart to another: don't delete it.

[Kathy]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=12948.msg131267#msg131267 date=1443388834]
I wholeheartedly agree with Julie's critique of helicopter parenting and the need for young adults to learn to take control of their own success.

But it is almost farcically naive in the stressful, complex world created by elite admissions processes.  The competition to get into schools like Stanford is so high that only students with elaborate support structures have a ghost of a chance.  I would bet that more than 90% of the entering students at elite institutions had parents who did at least one of these things: paid for extra college counseling; paid for SAT training; paid for lessons or memberships in extracurricular activities designed to enhance the application; paid for study abroad opportunities; use personal connections to arrange for summer internships; paid for travel expenses for college visits and interviews.  The numbers of students who could figure out how to do all of this by themselves without parental helicoptering is tiny.  Very few if any of these things would have been done a couple of generations ago when I was an applicant, and so it is the ramped-up competition driven by admissions offices that has helped to create helicopter parents.  Parents become personal-trainers preparing their kids for the brutal world of college admissions--a role that some of them apparently cannot set aside after college begins for their kids

All these books talking about getting away from intrusive parenting and emphasizing the need for young people to individuate and learn personal responsibility are correct in their goals; I do not think, however, that they truly understand the causes of the cultural shift that has produced this unhealthy environment. 

Now, let's say that Stanford decided to only admit students who have taken a year off after high school for national service of some sort, or to work at a job.  Let's say that it sharply limited the volume of extracurriculars, test scores, AP courses, etc. that can be on an application.  Let's say that it set a standard for admissions--high--but then randomly chose from all among all applicants who met the standard.  Let's say that it entered into a consortium with the Ivies and other elites and they all did the same.  Why then you might find a lot of helicopter crashes.

I think you're ignoring a vital point.  This (parents behavior) doesn't start out of the blue in middle school, it starts at birth.  Two generations of families have been influenced by what I consider a disservice from some (many?) childhood and psychology "experts" who, among other things, instructed parents to not say no to children, to avoid competition where there was a possibility of failure, to over-compensate for weaknesses and failings, to instilling in their children that they can do anything they want to do, have anything they want to have, because they are "special."  My wife and I witnessed it when our son was under one year old and we lived at Escondido Village, along with many grad students at the School of Education.  Some of the things we were subtly reprimanded for were ridiculous, in our opinion, including not hosting a birthday party fit for Elvis when he turned one.  Poor thing, missed out on professional clowns, catered meals, elaborate birthday cakes.  The horror.  He also suffered through pre-school, kindergarten, grade school, middle school and high school graduations without a personal limo in sight.  Once, at Escondido Village, a grad student chastised us that he didn't have enough toys and was lacking in stimulation.  His favorite toys were mommy' wooden spoons and mixing bowls (later he graduated to preferring the boxes toys came in to the toys themselves) and his stimulation came for being read to, sung to, and, most importantly, talked to incessantly.  And over the years we watched those kids with the toys and limos grow into sniveling, spoiled, entitled kids.  Then they tried to out do their parents when it came time to raise their own.  The stated reason, almost every time?  We want him/her to know they are special.  After 18 years of this why would anyone expect it to change when they turn 19?  After all, they might get angry if mom and dad weren't constantly there.  Every one of you who are parents know that a gentle, sudden slap on a well-padded bottom, along with a harsh No! goes along way towards developing a happy, productive member of society.  And isn't that the point?

I'll probably delete this later because it is too old fartish.
[/quote]

From one old fart to another: don't delete it.