If you want your children to have lives, don't send them to St. Albans, or Sidwell!!!!

[Anonymous]

I'm with 10:37 -- there needs to be some balance between having high academic standards and overloading kids with work. No sour grapes here -- I have a child at Sidwell and he's doing just fine, but things have definitely gotten out of balance there. Though stated in an inflammatory way, the OP's post has some merit -- though I don't know what the heck she/he means about the "construction haunting the school" -- sounds like the scene in Robert Altman's "Nashville" where the Brit TV reporter bemoans the loneliness of the school bus parking lot.

[Anonymous]

I'm 10:37 and I'll take it a step further. Isn't there a point at which burdensome workloads risk compromising higher academic standards? Kids need more time to think as well as more time to play.

And the kind of skills college professors would like to see kids learn in HS are things like close reading of texts, clear and well-organized writing, judgment about sources, number sense, experimental design, the ability to analyze (a problem, a document, a result) -- all skills that can be taught/learned on a smaller scale.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. I just think it's unfair to single out 2 schools on this front. This is a nationwide trend (and not limited to private schools either).

[Anonymous]

If Sidwell is too challenging for a particular child, then the parents should take the child out. Problem solved. I'm sure Sidwell or any other top-tier school can find another child who would fit well into that environment and I'm sure there are other less challenging schools who would take your child.

Now if you keep your child at a top-tier school that is too difficult simply because you're preoccupied with being at one of the Big 3, then you have no one to blame but yourself...

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, you can have high academic standards without oppressive workloads. And even kids who have the intelligence, drive, and interest to excel academically at Sidwell may find it grueling. Basically, it's hard to do college level work (reading, writing) when you have a high school class schedule (30+ hours a week in class vs. 8-15). And that's before we get to extracurriculars and some semblance of a home life.

[Anonymous]

How arrogant. You're so dominating (in your dreams).

[Anonymous]

I agree that the question is a broader one. But I also think that it's important to stop valorizing these kinds of workloads and suggesting that people who question them have kids who can't compete. In that sense, the Big 2 style headline frames the issue in an attention-getting way. More abstractly, the question is is the best school (for your DC) the hardest school (your DC can handle)? And/or are the most demanding schools (in terms of time that must be devoted to academics) the ones that provide the best education?

We're all voting with our feet (or our DCs' feet)! on these issues and, to some extent, the prestige of these schools is a function of where people with smart ambitious kids send their children to school. And what those schools are selling is, in part, a reflection of what they think the parents of these kids are demanding.

[Anonymous]

I agree. Once you determine that a school is not a good fit, why force your DC to stay there and suffer?

Anonymous wrote:If Sidwell is too challenging for a particular child, then the parents should take the child out. Problem solved. I'm sure Sidwell or any other top-tier school can find another child who would fit well into that environment and I'm sure there are other less challenging schools who would take your child.

Now if you keep your child at a top-tier school that is too difficult simply because you're preoccupied with being at one of the Big 3, then you have no one to blame but yourself...

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, you can have high academic standards without oppressive workloads. And even kids who have the intelligence, drive, and interest to excel academically at Sidwell may find it grueling. Basically, it's hard to do college level work (reading, writing) when you have a high school class schedule (30+ hours a week in class vs. 8-15). And that's before we get to extracurriculars and some semblance of a home life.

[Anonymous]

The OP is a troll. And I bet his/her kid wasn't at St. Albans.

[Anonymous]

There are definitely kids who thrive in a challenging and competitive academic environment that some would call "pressure-cooker" and kids who do not. Such schools are not a good fit for those who deem them a "pressure-cookers."

[Anonymous]

I'm the PP who posted that things are just out of balance. Don't jump to conclusions that my child can't "handle" the workload or that we are "forcing" him to stay at Sidwell -- his grades are excellent and he loves the school, but, as parents, with considerably more life experience, we see that his success comes at a cost. This doesn't mean that we don't like a lot of things about the school, just that we think they need to dial it down a notch.

[Anonymous]

I agree that the OP is not a former STA parent. Someone has been continually trying, on multiple threads, to connect STA and the other top area schools with GP. While GP is no doubt a good school, it is not STA or Sidwell in terms of academics. And that is fine. GP attracts very few of the hyper competitive members of the DC law/media/political world. Having been around private schools in DC for decades, I know very few people who who would apply to both STA and GP, even those interested in single sex schools. Different schools, different strengths, different parent populations.

[Anonymous]

I think that two ideas are getting conflates here: pressure cooker environment and a lot of homework. They are distinct issues. Maybe just maybe we could agree that more homework is not necessarily a good thing and that many schools have let this get to an over the top level. Personally, I'd love to see it dialed down although it's a bit of a Pandora's box and the parents who complain often get accused of seeming soft or anti teacher or something. Pressure cooker environments are created in a lot of different ways beyond the amount of homework and speak more to a school's culture. Certainly on that point each child will experence pressures differently and it is up to the parents to evaluate why is best. And don't worry, a lot of that pressure comes subtly or not so from the parents themselves!

[Anonymous]

omfg.. not again.

[Anonymous]

For those complaining, why on earth would you keep your child at a school where your child is not happy or the workload is too heavy? It's not like public school where you are assigned to one school and just you can't switch. The benefit of going private is that if you are not happy, you can take your $30K/year and go elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that two ideas are getting conflates here: pressure cooker environment and a lot of homework. They are distinct issues. Maybe just maybe we could agree that more homework is not necessarily a good thing and that many schools have let this get to an over the top level. Personally, I'd love to see it dialed down although it's a bit of a Pandora's box and the parents who complain often get accused of seeming soft or anti teacher or something. Pressure cooker environments are created in a lot of different ways beyond the amount of homework and speak more to a school's culture. Certainly on that point each child will experence pressures differently and it is up to the parents to evaluate why is best. And don't worry, a lot of that pressure comes subtly or not so from the parents themselves!

Yes, exactly! Heavy homework [does not equal] pressure cooker [does not equal] academic rigor, at least for most students. All separate issues.