Capitol Hill - middle school and beyond?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

I thought the argument PPs were making is that Latin is outperforming Basis?

Yes, based on college placement. So therefore, according to the PP, "something must be wrong" with Basis because they push for rigor yet none of the kids went to Ivies last year.

I took the PP to mean that something seems to be wrong with the model because BASIS itself seems to value college placement above all else, but its system isn’t producing those results.

Perhaps related, some of the BASIS bashers on here are disgruntled BASIS families and former families.

I agree many people who bash BASIS are disgruntled families and former families. That does not reflect well on BASIS.

Some bashers are people who lotteried for BASIS, didn't get in, and are unhappy with their MS (people who are happy aren't going to hate on BASIS).

And some bashers are people who do not find the BASIS approach appealing and resent the idea that BASIS is the best option that families who want academic rigor but cannot live IB for Deal/Hardy have. This is actually a lot of families. If you live on the East side and care about education, all you hear for years is how your IB MS is bad. Then you hear who actually DCI isn't even that good academically, and the only advantage is language. Then you hear Latin is actually middling academically and a lot of kids coast. Then you hear the parochial schools aren't that good either, plus you pay for it (and limited options for girls anyway). ITS is too touchy-feely and has no HS. Montessori doesn't work at the MS level and no high school. What are you left with? BASIS. And if you look at the BASIS approach and go "that is not for us," you feel resentful. Where's the academically rigorous but HOLISTIC option. Where's the honors tracking and differentiation but with decent extra-curriculars and a good campus? You can't have that. You can have one of those other options, or BASIS.

It makes people mad. They want both.

OR, people are genuinely happy at their MS so bash BASIS because they feel it's not all it's cracked up to be. People are irritated by others with the perception that if you're not at BASIS, you can't possibly be happy because nothing else is as good. That irks people who perceive their own school as being viewed as inferior to BASIS when they feel it is fine.

Or people are genuinely happy at their MS, or at least okay with it, or slightly dissatisfied with it, including Basis people, and they just go on with their lives, and a few bizarre obsessives turn every MS thread into a generic Basis bashing/praising fest for unknowable reasons of their own.

[Anonymous]

Why are people writing “BASIS” in all-caps? Is it an acronym? Just curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

I thought the argument PPs were making is that Latin is outperforming Basis?

Yes, based on college placement. So therefore, according to the PP, "something must be wrong" with Basis because they push for rigor yet none of the kids went to Ivies last year.

I took the PP to mean that something seems to be wrong with the model because BASIS itself seems to value college placement above all else, but its system isn’t producing those results.

Perhaps related, some of the BASIS bashers on here are disgruntled BASIS families and former families.

I agree many people who bash BASIS are disgruntled families and former families. That does not reflect well on BASIS.

Some bashers are people who lotteried for BASIS, didn't get in, and are unhappy with their MS (people who are happy aren't going to hate on BASIS).

And some bashers are people who do not find the BASIS approach appealing and resent the idea that BASIS is the best option that families who want academic rigor but cannot live IB for Deal/Hardy have. This is actually a lot of families. If you live on the East side and care about education, all you hear for years is how your IB MS is bad. Then you hear who actually DCI isn't even that good academically, and the only advantage is language. Then you hear Latin is actually middling academically and a lot of kids coast. Then you hear the parochial schools aren't that good either, plus you pay for it (and limited options for girls anyway). ITS is too touchy-feely and has no HS. Montessori doesn't work at the MS level and no high school. What are you left with? BASIS. And if you look at the BASIS approach and go "that is not for us," you feel resentful. Where's the academically rigorous but HOLISTIC option. Where's the honors tracking and differentiation but with decent extra-curriculars and a good campus? You can't have that. You can have one of those other options, or BASIS.

It makes people mad. They want both.

If Latin is sending a bunch of people to Ivys, etc., the how is it middling? Maybe the issue is not that you can't have an academically rigorous but holistic option, but rather that you are hearing the wrong things.

I mean of course you are hearing the wrong things, because there are people who like these schools and people who don't -- all of them. Every school has boosters, including the DCPS schools. I've heard negative things about overcrowding and fighting at Deal. Does that mean it's a bad school? No.

One thing about Latin and BASIS is that because there are many families, especially on the East side, who want at least the option of going there, and relatively few families get those opportunities, it encourages a lot of speculation. With a school like Stuart Hobson, you still get people bashing it or boosting it, but the truth is that if you want to go to Stuart Hobson, even OOB, your odds are pretty good that you can. So you can go see for yourself. Latin and BASIS are these black boxes to a lot of families, and that means people take the speculation more seriously because you're probably only going to get one chance to go to one of those schools, and it's not even a very good chance.

[Anonymous]

BASIS had a relatively bad college list last year. One year it had I believe 2 Yale, Oxford, Cambridge & MIT. Latin got one kid into Princeton last year. I think nothing comparable the year before. My impression, and I could be wrong, is that BASIS college admissions are considerably better overall. Folks looking at 1 single year where they were basically comparable & extracting that Latin has overall done better overall do not seem correct to me based on the full lists we've seen previously. Also, my impression is the Latin graduating class is larger than BASIS', so that's a factor too.

I am not only interested in Ivy+, though I am admittedly interested in that. Rather, I am interested in T25ish, T5 liberal arts & T10 publics, as well as merit aid to any that offer it.

[Anonymous]

^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

I think you are in for a rude awakening, Entitlement. This is no longer a reasonable expectation; in fact, it’s an embarrassing presumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

I think you are in for a rude awakening, Entitlement. This is no longer a reasonable expectation; in fact, it’s an embarrassing presumption.

Agree to disagree. Maybe our definition of smart or educated family is different. I will absolutely be disappointed if my kids can't get into UCSB/UCD/UFlorida/Vanderbilt/WUSTL/Notre Dame/Emory & I'm not embarassed about that. It's not about entitlement. They're not entitled to go to those schools. I will be disappointed if they don't perform well enough to deserve to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We thought we’d be set with BASIS for middle and then high school either at BASIS or another option like Walls or Banneker.

We’re two years into BASIS and deeply unimpressed. Child has good grades and likes it, but we have found the teaching quality inconsistent and the administration infuriating. We came to the conclusion we were not okay with it as a high school option; other options are too big of a question mark in terms of admission. So we’re actively house hunting outside DC.

What about the administration is infuriating?

The leadership is disingenuous when confronted with genuine questions and concerns, among other things. They also don’t follow through with certain things they talk a lot about (I.e. being anti bullying).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

I think you are in for a rude awakening, Entitlement. This is no longer a reasonable expectation; in fact, it’s an embarrassing presumption.

Agree to disagree. Maybe our definition of smart or educated family is different. I will absolutely be disappointed if my kids can't get into UCSB/UCD/UFlorida/Vanderbilt/WUSTL/Notre Dame/Emory & I'm not embarassed about that. It's not about entitlement. They're not entitled to go to those schools. I will be disappointed if they don't perform well enough to deserve to.

Like I said: you are in for a rude awakening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

I think you are in for a rude awakening, Entitlement. This is no longer a reasonable expectation; in fact, it’s an embarrassing presumption.

Agree to disagree. Maybe our definition of smart or educated family is different. I will absolutely be disappointed if my kids can't get into UCSB/UCD/UFlorida/Vanderbilt/WUSTL/Notre Dame/Emory & I'm not embarassed about that. It's not about entitlement. They're not entitled to go to those schools. I will be disappointed if they don't perform well enough to deserve to.

Like I said: you are in for a rude awakening.

PP's kids may perform well enough to deserve to get into those schools -- the issue is that these days they still might not get in. There are too many kids competing for the same seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

SH? Lol. You must be smoking something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

Ivy+?

Let me guess. Tulane?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

Yes. These days most homework is completed at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

And you lost me.