Anonymous wrote: As a former Lowell parent, I think 9:11 above made a wise decision. Progressive schools think they are good with young ADHD kids, but usually the entire ethos of the school runs in the other direction. These schools tend to think they are "good" for these children because they usually are rather tolerant of a bit of acting out, but that is not that helpful to the child in the long term and it is most unhelpful to the rest of the children in the short term.
To address 17:52's point, yes, a parent with kids at both schools or a teacher who has taught at both is in the best position to directly judge the curriculum differences. But without starting a firestorm here (I hope), I think it is pretty widely accepted that McLean markets itself and has a hire percentage of kids who, on average, have more academic or social needs than Lowell kids, and that McLean is more structured. I think it is also fairly undisputed that when kids graduate from Lowell (at least form the lower school - don't know about the middle) often 1/3- 1/2 of the class ends up at schools usually thought of as more academically selective than McLean on average (always exceptions) like GDS, Maret, Sidwell, NCS, etc. and I think it is much less common for McLean students to make such a switch. Not scientific, but these are relevant data points from which one can make some comparisons as to the curriculum and what kids are ready for. It isn't perfect, but probably informative. Good luck OP with whatever you decide.
It's nice to know Lowell graduates go to selective schools, but can you speak to how they help kids with ADHD and executive function weaknesses?
|
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}