Beauvoir vs Maret academically

[Anonymous]

To the 9:30 poster: Do you think that Beauvoir is stronger in math than GDS? Also, was wondering what you were referring to when you said that the GDS curriculum jumps all over the place. What areas did you find you needed the most supplementation? Have you found that your Beauvoir child did not need any supplementation? Thanks for all insights. Your post was very very useful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the 9:30 poster: Do you think that Beauvoir is stronger in math than GDS? Also, was wondering what you were referring to when you said that the GDS curriculum jumps all over the place. What areas did you find you needed the most supplementation? Have you found that your Beauvoir child did not need any supplementation? Thanks for all insights. Your post was very very useful.

15:31 - I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to state with any amount of certainty what types of children thrive at Beauvoir. I think the best persons to answer that are long-time faculty members, the head of school and the admissions director because they have probably seen it all. They have many years of experience dealing with probably the full gamet of types of children, and can say who thrives and who has more difficulty. I imagine these years of experience are what inform their decisions regarding admissions. The classes do seem diverse, and not at all cookie cutter.

18:48 - Both Beauvoir and GDS use some elements of Every Day Math. Each supplements that with other materials. I like Beauvoir's approach to math because I believe it presents materials in a more logical order. Every Day Math is a spiraling curriculum and, by itself or if relied on too heavily, can be confusing. I have not (as of yet...who knows in the future) had to supplement at Beauvoir. I have supplemented heavily at GDS for math in particularly, initially to make sure the foundation was there and subsequently to provide more challenging work. I have also supplemented for foreign language at GDS (which starts in 3rd versus in PreK at Beauvoir). I don't think the need to supplement is a bad thing or necessarily speaks negatively of the school. I do think we sometimes feel we are paying tons of money and that the schools should take care of educating our children thoroughly. However, with a few years under out belts we recognize that no school is going to perfectly meet the needs of every child and we have to be partners with the schools in educating our children. So I have come to expect that there will be times when I need to pay for supplements regardless of where the children are in school.

As for jumping all over the place, again I'm just speaking to what appears to be a lack of logical ordering of topics and a lot of back and forth moving between topics. I believe it's GDS's way of helping children become more independent thinkers and to more readily make connections between topics, but it doesn't feel natural or logical to all children or parents.

As for rigor, neither Beauvoir nor GDS (lower school) is rigorous. My understanding is that it's about building blocks and establishing a solid foundation at these lower grades more so than creating rigor. Homework is about the same, not that that's a measure of rigor. At GDS, the rigor starts at 6th and ramps up sharply (like almost a zero to 60) from what I understand from current GDS parents with older children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Sidwell's elementary is famously weak. Its the dirty secret known to everyone in Sidwell.

I am curious about this. Having toured the schools and spoken to parents of children at the schools featured in this thread, I am not sure how any impartial/disinterested observer can come to this conclusion.

[Anonymous]

9:01, just curious: why do you have a DC at GDS if you feel that Beauvoir provides a stronger foundation for the PK-3 experience?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9:01, just curious: why do you have a DC at GDS if you feel that Beauvoir provides a stronger foundation for the PK-3 experience?

9:01 has been incredibly generous on this board. Please don't pry or attack her. Just say, "Thank you."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:01, just curious: why do you have a DC at GDS if you feel that Beauvoir provides a stronger foundation for the PK-3 experience?

9:01 has been incredibly generous on this board. Please don't pry or attack her. Just say, "Thank you."

Why? If the GDS PK-3 is substandard to Beauvoir's than I am interested in why 9:01 would keep a child at GDS.

[Anonymous]

I don't think PP said GDS is "substandard to Beauvoir", she said that she thought it was weaker in certain specific areas. Perhaps she finds GDS strong in other areas, or perhaps she thinks they want GDS for middle and high school, and that the early years are different yet roughly comparable.

[Anonymous]

1st, 3rd, and 4th grade were great and highly ambitious academically at GDS, so I wouldn't say rigor kicks in at 6th. I don't know how much writing kids do and at what age these days in other schools, but DH and I were also impressed at how early and often DC wrote in PreK/K. Writing preceded reading for many kids. Because inventive spelling was acceptable, some parents might not consider their approach "rigorous," but if your goal is to create students who enjoy writing and write well, GDS lays the groundwork from an early age.

I suspect that GDS's approach to early education looks disorganized/chaotic to many of us who were educated differently. Things like the spiral curriculum, writing before reading, and inventive spelling can seem kind of random when you are used to/looking for a different type of order. And I agree with PP that communication isn't always the greatest -- I have an education background so I basically knew what they were doing and why, but I wouldn't have understood (or necessarily embraced) the approach had I not been familiar with the logic behind it before DC started school.

Overall, I have to say I've been amazed at how effortlessly my DC has learned. At first it was a little unnerving -- I wondered if she would have the discipline necessary to take on harder and lengthier projects, but as it turns out those are the kind that make DC happiest. I agree with the "depends on the kid" answer to which school is best. But for my kind of kid (independent, curious, ambitious), GDS was an excellent choice for the PreK-3 years as well as beyond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9:01, just curious: why do you have a DC at GDS if you feel that Beauvoir provides a stronger foundation for the PK-3 experience?

9:01 has been incredibly generous on this board. Please don't pry or attack her. Just say, "Thank you."

Why? If the GDS PK-3 is substandard to Beauvoir's than I am interested in why 9:01 would keep a child at GDS.

GDS is not substandard by any stretch of the imagination. I hope my comments didn’t imply that. There are many, many ways in which GDS is working for us right now despite the areas that I think are better served at Beauvoir. You don’t know what you don’t know until you’re in it, or rather until your child is in it and responding to it. Now that we’re in it, we recognize that while GDS’s strength may not reside n the lower school (in our opinion), we cannot be shortsighted by missing the big picture. GDS is a long term commitment for us. We have high expectations for the middle and high school, and believe that GDS can and does deliver.

[Anonymous]

Could anyone comment on OP's original question about B vs M academically? I am curious as well...