Academically challenging but socially supportive school?

[Anonymous]

Any recommendations for an academically challenging school but one that is socially supportive? My 3d grade DS is very shy and is not comfortable socially at his current school. He was fine last year, but he's been seriously unhappy all year this year. I'm not at the point where I'm ready to move him yet, but want to start thinking about what the alternatives are. I'm looking for a place that has some structured social activities, e.g., at recess, and a good social curriculum. We're in the Bethesda/NW DC area. Thanks in advance!

[Anonymous]

My 3rd grader needs the same thing. Let me know if you find anything!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any recommendations for an academically challenging school but one that is socially supportive? My 3d grade DS is very shy and is not comfortable socially at his current school. He was fine last year, but he's been seriously unhappy all year this year. I'm not at the point where I'm ready to move him yet, but want to start thinking about what the alternatives are. I'm looking for a place that has some structured social activities, e.g., at recess, and a good social curriculum. We're in the Bethesda/NW DC area. Thanks in advance!

I am not sure that many places will have social structures for recess, given that they are supposed to be a very free time. I do remember the Oneness Family school having a conflict resolution table where the kids would sit and talk through the things which might have gone wrong / fix them / express feelings etc.

I don't know if that is the kind of place you'd consider, nor do I know enough about them academically to help.

[Anonymous]

Lowell, Sheridan
They are small and thus can't do as much differentiation at some of the larger schools. Our DD went to Lowell, and when moved to a larger and notoriously academically rigorous school for MS/HS she quickly was placed in the top math track and did very well, so she was plenty prepared. Lots of kids from Sheridan came to the school for HS and also seemed to do just fine, so suspect either would be fine academically and likely more supportive socially than some of the other independent schools

[Anonymous]

Definitely Lowell. We have seen strong placements out academically consistently for many years and no one is better with the social emotional support.

[Anonymous]

We were looking for the same for our 5 year old. Sheridan and Lowell were at the top of our list for K entry. Went with Sheridan where our "shy" boy has totally come out of his shell and it totally engaged in everything from academics to sports.

There is still time to attend open houses at both.

Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Grace Episcopal Day School in Kensington, MD

[Anonymous]

Seneca Academy is further out than most (Darnestown). But we have several Bethesda families here. There is a huge emphasis placed on social growth, collaboration instead of competition, and on being a good friend. Recess doesn't have structure. But it does have a "buddy bench." If someone feels they need a friend, they can sit on the buddy bench and hang out with them. Here's some information on the use of Responsive Classroom. Many schools use it, so it's not unique to Seneca. But I've really come to appreciate it for my child.

http://www.senecaacademy.org/private-elementary-curriculum/#social


It only goes through 5th, though.

[Anonymous]

This is not intended as a slam at Lowell -- it is a fine school in many ways -- but in this case I would tell OP based on her description of her child socially that they should really avoid Lowell. Based on our experience, it would not be a good fit.

Our child needed very slight social structure at Lowell --some sort of option for an organized activity after lunch or some adult supervision for physical games on the ball fields, for example -- and they were really ideologically opposed to making the effort at unstructured times -- recess and lunch. Because of this ideological predisposition, I also think they were structurally not set up to be responsive without reordering faculty lunch periods, etc., which, of course, made it so that when one very young teacher was willing to make some effort he essentially only could do so once per week for a month or so during the year.

Raising the issue a few times as parents only made us and our child seem like outliers in the eyes of the administration which probably adversely impacted exit recommendations for our bright child when it was time to move on to the next level school. Just to be clear, what we were looking for was no more than what I recall from public school decades ago -- maybe a teacher participating as a pitcher in a lunch time softball game, or as a referee with a little guidance in how kids can set up their own soccer games, or a teacher who could just facilitate kids playing some socially interactive but non-sports games, etc. And at a minimum at least another staff person so that all the kids -- some of whom were getting into a bit more troubling mischief than they should have -- could remain within the sight lines of the teachers during lunch recess.

OP, I wish you well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: This is not intended as a slam at Lowell -- it is a fine school in many ways -- but in this case I would tell OP based on her description of her child socially that they should really avoid Lowell. Based on our experience, it would not be a good fit.

Our child needed very slight social structure at Lowell --some sort of option for an organized activity after lunch or some adult supervision for physical games on the ball fields, for example -- and they were really ideologically opposed to making the effort at unstructured times -- recess and lunch. Because of this ideological predisposition, I also think they were structurally not set up to be responsive without reordering faculty lunch periods, etc., which, of course, made it so that when one very young teacher was willing to make some effort he essentially only could do so once per week for a month or so during the year.

Raising the issue a few times as parents only made us and our child seem like outliers in the eyes of the administration which probably adversely impacted exit recommendations for our bright child when it was time to move on to the next level school. Just to be clear, what we were looking for was no more than what I recall from public school decades ago -- maybe a teacher participating as a pitcher in a lunch time softball game, or as a referee with a little guidance in how kids can set up their own soccer games, or a teacher who could just facilitate kids playing some socially interactive but non-sports games, etc. And at a minimum at least another staff person so that all the kids -- some of whom were getting into a bit more troubling mischief than they should have -- could remain within the sight lines of the teachers during lunch recess.

OP, I wish you well.

The likely opposed it because the kids spend all day in adult directed activities and kids need time to be in kid directed only activities. And yes, what you are describing is a teacher led activity. Other parents would not be happy with this.

As far as the OP's situation, I have raised this point before on this board but small private schools are great but you need a reality check. Your child needs to enter a very small class of kids who have no likely been together since PreK or K. Even in 3rd grade, this can be tough if your child doesn't fit in very well with the already in place social structure. A shy kid is going to have to try harder socially. Every school will facilitate in class social emotional curriculum but this doesn't mean that a shy child won't still be shy, or still have trouble fitting. It isn't a guarantee that every kid will be his friend or even be friendly with him outside the classroom. When checking out schools, ask to see the class that your child would join and observe for a while. Can you really see your child fitting into that class?

[Anonymous]

Norwood has a good social curriculum - happens in morning chapel (not religious in nature, just a carry over in name from when the school was episcopal - not any more). Also proactively carried out by school counselors. Their motto is How You Lead Your Life Matters and kids really understand what that means. Not sure what you mean by structured social activities at recess but I do think the size at Norwood is good for healthy and positive social interactions - big enough for lots of different types of kids but not so big that kids get lost. Have seen several kids in both of my children's classes blossom.

[Anonymous]

I highly recommend Green Acres. The teachers really work hard to integrate new students socially. My son transferred in and the transition was very smooth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I highly recommend Green Acres. The teachers really work hard to integrate new students socially. My son transferred in and the transition was very smooth.

+1 The teachers and staff really know every child...really. They spend a lot of time observing at recess and lunch (most unstructured times of the day) to observe and intervene (when necessary) when they see social situations come up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Norwood has a good social curriculum - happens in morning chapel (not religious in nature, just a carry over in name from when the school was episcopal - not any more). Also proactively carried out by school counselors. Their motto is How You Lead Your Life Matters and kids really understand what that means. Not sure what you mean by structured social activities at recess but I do think the size at Norwood is good for healthy and positive social interactions - big enough for lots of different types of kids but not so big that kids get lost. Have seen several kids in both of my children's classes blossom.

Yeah, in theory. But there are some real discipline issues at Norwood, especially among the boys, in the lower school (can't comment on upper).

[Anonymous]

22:39 wrote in part (numbers inserted for clarity):

"They likely opposed it because the kids spend all day in adult directed activities and [1] kids need time to be in kid directed only activities. And yes, what you are describing is a teacher led activity. [2] Other parents would not be happy with this."

I agree with point one above generally, but disagree that this precludes having an adult facilitated option at what is finally becoming more recognized as the most challenging time of the school day for many elementary age children. I would actually argue that in small privates it is even more important to offer a structured alternative than in a larger public because in the former it is harder to escape majority social pressure than in a larger class. An adult facilitated option helps younger kids who don't follow the majority to either resist social pressure, or provide a cushion against their feeling totally ostracized. It also provides eyes on to prevent bullying and similar undesirable behaviors. More pragmatically, it encourages the existence of a smaller social group alternative to a majority activity. This will be unnecessary as kids get older and attend schools with larger classes, and some kids may be fine with unstructured time with peers in a different setting after school. Academically strong students may be able to do this perfectly well with similar peers during the class room day as well.

The presumption that all kids need breaks with no adult guidance during recess or lunch is itself an opinion that assumes what is good for some kids is necessarily good for all or almost all kids. That is an example of the sort of ideological presumption that I believe OP needs to be careful to avoid. As for point 2, I can't imagine a parent having a valid objection that their child has the option to do something entirely without an adult or to do something adult facilitated. What would it be? That before there was an alternative we had better soccer games because more kids played unsupervised even though it now is clear some of them wanted to be doing something else?