k-12 or k-8?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can get into a K-12 where you can see your DC would be happy, enroll. You can always apply out if it turns out to be a poor fit. It's much harder to get into the competitive schools as the kids get older. Not only are you applying against your classmates, which is its own special form of stress, but also against top-performing kids from public schools. That being said, if you can't find a K-12 where you think DC would be happy, then I would opt for a K-8, K-3, or a school focused on younger children.

It’s very hard to see where your five year old would be happy at seventeen. Especially since upper schools can be Very different from lower schools, even at the same school.

We made the same mistake of assuming a K-12 "one and done" approach. Turns out it wasn't the right fit after a couple of years. We applied out to several non-k12 schools. Chose K-6 and then moved to a K-8. Now applying for high school. Sure the application process is lengthly and can be arduous, but having your child at a school that is the right fit is worth the effort. Our experience has shown that K-8s do middle school best. Our friends at K-12s feel middle school is lacking OR too intense. The fact is children change so much over the course of their school lifetime. A three year old and a 12 year old are very different people. Middle school has been the biggest change of all for our child. We never expected the enormous change is study habits, ability and drive that developed between 6th and 8th grades. Therefore our school search changed drastically this time around. Don't be afraid of outplacement, kids usually end up where they belong and do well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There has been some research that shows that K-8's are better for kids in the middle school years. I also think that going through the looking at schools, applying, interviewing, process and then having to make friends and find your place in a new community at that 8th/9th grade age (whether you are coming from a K-8, a public middle school or transferring from another K-12) makes the college application process and social transition to college less daunting.

One thing I liked about some K-8s is that there was a lot of emphasis on preparing the 7th and 8th graders to make a transition AND to prepare families to make the right choices for their individual child (the kids from the K-8s we looked at go to a big range of programs--private, Catholic, public, and magnet public. You're right in that, in many ways, this prepares kids and families for the college transition when it is handled well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can get into a K-12 where you can see your DC would be happy, enroll. You can always apply out if it turns out to be a poor fit. It's much harder to get into the competitive schools as the kids get older. Not only are you applying against your classmates, which is its own special form of stress, but also against top-performing kids from public schools. That being said, if you can't find a K-12 where you think DC would be happy, then I would opt for a K-8, K-3, or a school focused on younger children.

It’s very hard to see where your five year old would be happy at seventeen. Especially since upper schools can be Very different from lower schools, even at the same school.

Isn't the point, though, that if your kid turns out to be unhappy, you can switch out of a K-12? FWIW, two of my children went to a K-12 as lifers and loved middle school at both. I think that being a "lifer" actually cushioned the blow of middle school. I know that this is not the case for everyone, but statistically, the clear majority (90%+) of the kids who started the K-12 in the younger grades stayed to graduate in 12th. The few who left turned out to have learning disabilities that were incompatible with the academic demands of the school. (Most of the kids with LDs were able to be accommodated.)

[Anonymous]

It’s hard to explain to those who haven’t been at a K-8, how fundamentally different they are institutionally from a K-12. K-12s are going to be measured and judged principally by how good the high school is. So I t’s only natural that that is where the most institutional energy and attention will be focused. And high schools take a lot of resources and administrative attention to run well: beyond the academics, you’re talking about college counseling and placement, performing arts programs, athletics programs, sophisticated STEM programs (and the facilities to go with it), the list goes on.

Administrators, heads of school, boards of trustees only have so much time and attention to allocate. Sure, K-12 schools have division heads (as do most K-8 schools), but then they are one of several competing constituencies vying for institutional attention and resources. At a K-8 by contrast, there’s much more institutional ability to focus on every grade and every division, and to know that the entire institution up through the HoS and Board is focused on the lower and middle school experience. That may not matter to everyone, but it does make a noticeable difference when you experience it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to explain to those who haven’t been at a K-8, how fundamentally different they are institutionally from a K-12. K-12s are going to be measured and judged principally by how good the high school is. So I t’s only natural that that is where the most institutional energy and attention will be focused. And high schools take a lot of resources and administrative attention to run well: beyond the academics, you’re talking about college counseling and placement, performing arts programs, athletics programs, sophisticated STEM programs (and the facilities to go with it), the list goes on.

Administrators, heads of school, boards of trustees only have so much time and attention to allocate. Sure, K-12 schools have division heads (as do most K-8 schools), but then they are one of several competing constituencies vying for institutional attention and resources. At a K-8 by contrast, there’s much more institutional ability to focus on every grade and every division, and to know that the entire institution up through the HoS and Board is focused on the lower and middle school experience. That may not matter to everyone, but it does make a noticeable difference when you experience it.

Do you have any experience sending your children to a K-12?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to explain to those who haven’t been at a K-8, how fundamentally different they are institutionally from a K-12. K-12s are going to be measured and judged principally by how good the high school is. So I t’s only natural that that is where the most institutional energy and attention will be focused. And high schools take a lot of resources and administrative attention to run well: beyond the academics, you’re talking about college counseling and placement, performing arts programs, athletics programs, sophisticated STEM programs (and the facilities to go with it), the list goes on.

Administrators, heads of school, boards of trustees only have so much time and attention to allocate. Sure, K-12 schools have division heads (as do most K-8 schools), but then they are one of several competing constituencies vying for institutional attention and resources. At a K-8 by contrast, there’s much more institutional ability to focus on every grade and every division, and to know that the entire institution up through the HoS and Board is focused on the lower and middle school experience. That may not matter to everyone, but it does make a noticeable difference when you experience it.

Do you have any experience sending your children to a K-12?

Yes

[Anonymous]

I don't think all K-8s or K-12s are equal, so you need to really look at the options you are specifically considering. I went to a K-12 but the campus had two parts, although they were connected. The lower school was on one end and the middle school was next to it. The upper school was across the street, although all the land was owned by the school. It made the middle schoolers seem more like top dogs, which can be a benefit for a K-8 model because the upper school students were never on the other part of the campus. The school was also very invested in the younger grades, putting a lot of money into programs (music, science, athletics) for K-8. So I think a K-12 like that can be great. Other K-12s seem to put so much more emphasis on the upper school in terms of money that the lower and middle schools are more of an afterthought, without access to world-class engineering labs, sports facilities, etc. I think a K-12 like that would not be great before upper school. Some K-8s can also be great because they are super focused on younger kids so you're more likely to get a stellar education during those grades. Others, however, really miss out by not having start-of-the-art facilities because of their small size. We chose a K-12 for our twins because of that particular school and what it offered and also because I did enjoy going to the same school for all those years. Hopefully our kids will, too, otherwise we'll have to consider whether it makes sense to move them.

[Anonymous]

I love the K-8 model but the thought of the HS transition made 8th grade hugely stressful. I second leaving earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There has been some research that shows that K-8's are better for kids in the middle school years. I also think that going through the looking at schools, applying, interviewing, process and then having to make friends and find your place in a new community at that 8th/9th grade age (whether you are coming from a K-8, a public middle school or transferring from another K-12) makes the college application process and social transition to college less daunting.

This may be true for some kids. I'm a PP who went to a K-12 and applied to 12 colleges around the country and ended up at one on the other side from where I grew up and I didn't find the college application process difficult or the social transition to college daunting in the least. I could also see the reverse, which is that kids were so stressed out from the high school application process and perhaps didn't end up where they wanted so then they spend four years worrying about college applications. So

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can get into a K-12 where you can see your DC would be happy, enroll. You can always apply out if it turns out to be a poor fit. It's much harder to get into the competitive schools as the kids get older. Not only are you applying against your classmates, which is its own special form of stress, but also against top-performing kids from public schools. That being said, if you can't find a K-12 where you think DC would be happy, then I would opt for a K-8, K-3, or a school focused on younger children.

It’s very hard to see where your five year old would be happy at seventeen. Especially since upper schools can be Very different from lower schools, even at the same school.

True, but you should make sure when applying to K that you also tour and learn about the middle and upper schools. We did because we anticipate that our kids will stay through graduation in 12th grade (time will only tell) and one of the reasons we chose that school was because of what we learned about the middle and upper schools. Yes, it's always fair to say that kids can change a lot between ages 5 and 17, so what may be a great fit now won't be one later, but you should still take the time to learn about the middle and upper schools when applying.

[Anonymous]

You've got a 4 year old so be present for the child you have. Focus on what seems best for the recent-toddler now, rather than what might be good for her in 10 years. Every child is going to learn to read, write, add and multiply over the next few years. No every child is confident, secure, generous, empathetic, and caring. Pay attention to what kind of environment that DC thrives in now - academic vs. play, indoors vs. outdoors, group vs. individual, structured vs. free, peer oriented vs. adult focused -- and family factors like the commute, parent community and density/distance to classmates. Maybe you need a school that build your child in ways that you aren't good at. Or maybe you need a school that is a partner in supporting the values you want to instill. Those are the things to think about.

It's absolutely crazy to think that you know what your child will be like in high school and whether the good fit now will necessarily be the best fit then. As a parent of a preschooler, you probably have no idea what how to evaluate a high school. At high school, you will have a solid sense of the appropriate curriculum and social needs/wants of your DC. None of that is knowable now.

[Anonymous]

A top K-8 is the way to go. It should have good machinery in place and good relationships with all the local private upper schools. It also will focus all of its resources on those critical years. Plus, middle school kids get to be leaders and not, well, in the middle and sometimes overlooked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We did the K-8 for our children and while we had a great experience the HS search was more involved than I ever anticipated and it overshadowed the whole K-8 experience. I don’t regret having chosen the K-8. However, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight I wouldn’t choose it again. Lesson learned for my next life.

You must have misspoken. There is no way that the brief process of applying to high school during Oct-Dec of the 8th grade year overshadows the experience of the entire preceding 8 years (kindergarten, first, second grade, etc).

— BTDT at Sheridan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We did the K-8 for our children and while we had a great experience the HS search was more involved than I ever anticipated and it overshadowed the whole K-8 experience. I don’t regret having chosen the K-8. However, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight I wouldn’t choose it again. Lesson learned for my next life.

You must have misspoken. There is no way that the brief process of applying to high school during Oct-Dec of the 8th grade year overshadows the experience of the entire preceding 8 years (kindergarten, first, second grade, etc).

— BTDT at Sheridan

Not Sheridan but I share the pp’s views. If you end up with crappy HS options its easy to start to question what the point of it all was. Because you start to wonder what else the school told you that you shouldn’t have believed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to explain to those who haven’t been at a K-8, how fundamentally different they are institutionally from a K-12. K-12s are going to be measured and judged principally by how good the high school is. So I t’s only natural that that is where the most institutional energy and attention will be focused. And high schools take a lot of resources and administrative attention to run well: beyond the academics, you’re talking about college counseling and placement, performing arts programs, athletics programs, sophisticated STEM programs (and the facilities to go with it), the list goes on.

Administrators, heads of school, boards of trustees only have so much time and attention to allocate. Sure, K-12 schools have division heads (as do most K-8 schools), but then they are one of several competing constituencies vying for institutional attention and resources. At a K-8 by contrast, there’s much more institutional ability to focus on every grade and every division, and to know that the entire institution up through the HoS and Board is focused on the lower and middle school experience. That may not matter to everyone, but it does make a noticeable difference when you experience it.

Do you have any experience sending your children to a K-12?

I am not the PP. I emphatically agree with the above post, and I do have experience with one NWDC K-8 and one NWDC preK-12 (including a one-year tenure on the board at one of these.)

I'd choose both schools again tomorrow, btw. But PP is correct that the upper school demands an outsize amount of attention and resources.