Someone please give an example of a typical homework night at Sidwell/St. Albans/NCS/Holton/Landon

[Anonymous]

I've heard GDS has an overwhelming workload -- is it true?

DD in 9th grade at NCS -- about two hours a night.

Why do you carer how the PP describes her DC's grades? Seriously, lighten up.

[Anonymous]

O.K.--that works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you may have missed the point. PP is referring to the part where you say that your son gets "straight A's" and then in the next breath you talk about him getting Bs. He sounds like a good student, but the term "straight A's" is reserved for people who only get A's and nothing less--not for people who get both A's AND B's. Maybe you should have said that your son gets "mostly A's".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have a 8th-grade son at STA who gets straight A's but for maybe one or two B's a year, and I do not recall his ever having had to do five hours of homework in one night. Homework last year and this year usually takes two to three hours, depending on whether there's a test to study for. Sometimes homework is less, even nil. Anyone who's child is doing five hours of homework in middle school is probably struggling at that school and either should not be at that school or should get tutoring to be able to meet academic demands.

so your kid does not get straight A's

I guess you think my kid should work five hours a night, and then he might get straight A's? We're happy with his grades, but if you insist on straight A's for your kid, good for you!

No, to me "mostly A's" would be appropriate if describing a transcript on which more than 50% of the grades were A's. I was trying to be more specific than that in my description. Would you feel better if I said "my son gets A's except for one or two B's a year? If so, please feel free to substitute that phrase for the one in my post that you find objectionable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:O.K.--that works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you may have missed the point. PP is referring to the part where you say that your son gets "straight A's" and then in the next breath you talk about him getting Bs. He sounds like a good student, but the term "straight A's" is reserved for people who only get A's and nothing less--not for people who get both A's AND B's. Maybe you should have said that your son gets "mostly A's".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have a 8th-grade son at STA who gets straight A's but for maybe one or two B's a year, and I do not recall his ever having had to do five hours of homework in one night. Homework last year and this year usually takes two to three hours, depending on whether there's a test to study for. Sometimes homework is less, even nil. Anyone who's child is doing five hours of homework in middle school is probably struggling at that school and either should not be at that school or should get tutoring to be able to meet academic demands.

so your kid does not get straight A's

I guess you think my kid should work five hours a night, and then he might get straight A's? We're happy with his grades, but if you insist on straight A's for your kid, good for you!

No, to me "mostly A's" would be appropriate if describing a transcript on which more than 50% of the grades were A's. I was trying to be more specific than that in my description. Would you feel better if I said "my son gets A's except for one or two B's a year? If so, please feel free to substitute that phrase for the one in my post that you find objectionable.

If that works for you, why couldn't you have made the substitution yourself?

[Anonymous]

2-3 hours a night plus athletics, dinner, etc...? What time do these children go to bed - doesn't matter what school just curious about the life that my poor child will lead! This worries me but it sounds like this is the norm for most schools? TIA

[Anonymous]

Move on and stop cluttering up this thread with nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:O.K.--that works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you may have missed the point. PP is referring to the part where you say that your son gets "straight A's" and then in the next breath you talk about him getting Bs. He sounds like a good student, but the term "straight A's" is reserved for people who only get A's and nothing less--not for people who get both A's AND B's. Maybe you should have said that your son gets "mostly A's".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have a 8th-grade son at STA who gets straight A's but for maybe one or two B's a year, and I do not recall his ever having had to do five hours of homework in one night. Homework last year and this year usually takes two to three hours, depending on whether there's a test to study for. Sometimes homework is less, even nil. Anyone who's child is doing five hours of homework in middle school is probably struggling at that school and either should not be at that school or should get tutoring to be able to meet academic demands.

so your kid does not get straight A's

I guess you think my kid should work five hours a night, and then he might get straight A's? We're happy with his grades, but if you insist on straight A's for your kid, good for you!

No, to me "mostly A's" would be appropriate if describing a transcript on which more than 50% of the grades were A's. I was trying to be more specific than that in my description. Would you feel better if I said "my son gets A's except for one or two B's a year? If so, please feel free to substitute that phrase for the one in my post that you find objectionable.

If that works for you, why couldn't you have made the substitution yourself?

[Anonymous]

These schools are up front about being "highly competitive". If you don't want your children exposed to the rigors that go with that phrase, then don't send them to these schools.

It isn't a complicated concept.

[Anonymous]

That's right pp. I would say that if parents care (we did) about their kid going to a top 20 college -- they should have them go to one of these top "competitive schools". If they don't care -- go someplace easier. My daughter said that at her Ivy -- the only ones who could keep up with the workloads were kids who either came from the top boarding schools/private schools. Whereas some kids from top publics may have top SAT scores/grades...absolutely perfect...many still have a hard time keeping up with the college grind at the Ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These schools are up front about being "highly competitive". If you don't want your children exposed to the rigors that go with that phrase, then don't send them to these schools.

It isn't a complicated concept.

Few things are when you oversimplify!

Seriously, what you've said isn't responsive to anything substantive that has been said on this thread. The open questions include what's the relationship between rigor/high academic standards and workload? what kind of competition is this/should this be? and what's the best preparation for college? Do the kinds of hours and effort being required of high school kids today actually result in them being well-educated and, specifically, better educated than they would be if we made a conscious effort to limit the hours and to focus on the academic skills that are most crucial?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's right pp. I would say that if parents care (we did) about their kid going to a top 20 college -- they should have them go to one of these top "competitive schools". If they don't care -- go someplace easier. My daughter said that at her Ivy -- the only ones who could keep up with the workloads were kids who either came from the top boarding schools/private schools. Whereas some kids from top publics may have top SAT scores/grades...absolutely perfect...many still have a hard time keeping up with the college grind at the Ivies.

If I wanted to be sure my son could get into a "top 20" college, I would send him to Wilson, Blair, or BCC, rather than to Sidwell. He would be well prepared, and have more of an edge in admissions. But I care about other things, so I send him to Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

I don't believe your son goes to Sidwell pp.

[Anonymous]

14:51 Well said. Answer your questions and we can begin a thoughtful dialogue.

[Anonymous]

There is no direct correlation between hours of homework and success in college. The quality of the work, the creativity and accountability of the student, and the high standards set by the teacher and school (which the students strive to meet in an authentic way) are better predicting factors. If your child spends HOURS on homework, and they are NOT struggling academically, that school cannot fit its curriculum into its hours and is forcing that on the student at home. It is poor planning or poor teaching, one or the other. Parents often assume that hours spent on work out of the classroom are translating into a work ethic, but it often just prematurely stresses the child, is a time killer, and does not lead to any REAL learning.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree with you pp. There are so many students in colleges today that can complete hard task or assignments but are not necessarily critical thinkers. I am always impressed by the work ethic of some young people but are we giving them time to think and grow ideas. So many students burn out and at some point you look back and realize they never really enjoyed school or had the time to develop their special talents. That has to suck.

[Anonymous]

You're absolutely right--which is exactly why so many of us try to get our kids into the more competitive private schools. We're doing it, so that they will be well prepared and well poised to attend good colleges.

Anonymous wrote:That's right pp. I would say that if parents care (we did) about their kid going to a top 20 college -- they should have them go to one of these top "competitive schools". If they don't care -- go someplace easier. My daughter said that at her Ivy -- the only ones who could keep up with the workloads were kids who either came from the top boarding schools/private schools. Whereas some kids from top publics may have top SAT scores/grades...absolutely perfect...many still have a hard time keeping up with the college grind at the Ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You're absolutely right--which is exactly why so many of us try to get our kids into the more competitive private schools. We're doing it, so that they will be well prepared and well poised to attend good colleges.

Anonymous wrote:That's right pp. I would say that if parents care (we did) about their kid going to a top 20 college -- they should have them go to one of these top "competitive schools". If they don't care -- go someplace easier. My daughter said that at her Ivy -- the only ones who could keep up with the workloads were kids who either came from the top boarding schools/private schools. Whereas some kids from top publics may have top SAT scores/grades...absolutely perfect...many still have a hard time keeping up with the college grind at the Ivies.

You are fooling yourselves if you think private school kids are the only ones who can keep up at top universities. Guess you have to justify all that tuition money by putting the common folk down.