Independent schools and "advanced" kids: national problem?

[Anonymous]

I agree that there are tons of kids in the area who can work at least one grade above level. Privates do well accommodating these kids.

The difference may be with the kids who are working 2 or more years above grade level. MoCo accommodates these very well. Even in many non-magnet, run-of-the-mill MoCo schools, kids who are ready (or whose parents push, but let's not get into that here) are allowed to do math 2 grades above level. Our DC did this in an immersion program. We have also done private for elementary for one DC, and we looked at private middle schools. At several schools, including 2 top 3s, DC was looking at repeating pre-algebra for the first year of middle school. (Another hot button issue that will cause digressions is whether advancement is appropriate for every kid, but some kids are indeed ready for it, and let's leave it at that.)

Why do parents choose Big 3 schools regardless? For many kids, one year above-grade may be fine. I've read several places that an IQ of 120 is sufficient to succeed in almost any field, and anything above that is gravy. There may be other intangibles parents are looking for at a Big 3, such as perceptions (right or wrong, not worth getting into) about peer/social groups or that the Big 3 can leverage an average kid into an Ivy. Or the desire for social and other connections at the Big 3. And frankly, some MoCo schools have less than appealing facilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I toured 10-15 private schools this fall and probably 8-9 of them stated that their students work at least 1 grade level above their current grade. All of the students. That is why they have the applicants IQ tested and have them visit for "playdates" in the early grades. If the kid isn't going to be able to keep up, the schools are not interested (at least not the ones I visited). One of the ones I toured has 2 classes in 3rd and 4th grades where the students have to be at least 2 yrs ahead in math and reading to be in that class. I asked if there were a lot of kids who fit the bill and was told, yes there are.

Keep in mind that some of these kids are red shirted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also toured a number of well-respected private schools this year, observing 3rd and 4th grades, and while I was impressed with a lot of the benefits of the schools (small class sizes, etc.) I did not think that the level of work being done was any higher than what my children currently do in MCPS.

I think one big difference is probably that on-grade-level work is the baseline in privates, whereas in public school there can be many children working below grade level.

Good point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am confused by how many people we know, who are leaders in their fields, choose Big 3 schools .... But at least some these very smart people probably have reasonably smart children. Do these parents simply not understand that their kids are not getting the breath and depth of education that they could be getting in a public school? ... What do people on this board think about the "best" independent schools versus a good (but not magnet) Montgomery Country middle school and high school?

I think you're kidding yourself if you believe that private schools don't provide a good education. What measure do you want to use for comparison? Admission to top colleges? SAT scores? Nat'l Merit Semifinalists produced? Top scores in local math contests? Nat'l standardized tests? Students from private schools do very well under all those measures.

I absolutely think many kids can get a great education from public schools, and many can get a great education from private schools. To claim that either one is incapable of producing top students is just narrow-minded and false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the question is silly. We went into an independent school thinking that the cohort would be superior for lack of a better word. It is not a particularly advanced group and won't be until perhaps the 4th or 6th grade when admissions opens up again. At the moment, there are a lot of staff and legacy kids, and they really do take up a lot of teacher time bringing them up to speed and managing their behavior.

Yes, those teachers are often dragged down by their own children.

[Anonymous]

11:47 Ouch. I bet it's more sibling and legacy than connected.
Has anyone ever studied how many students who are counseled out from the more selective school are sibling and legacy and connected? That would be fascinating to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So for a bright child, it is simply better to attend MoCo elementary and certainly their magnets in elementary and middle than even the best independent school. I think a number of threads have now made this clear. I am confused by how many people we know, who are leaders in their fields, choose Big 3 schools. Means does not mean brains. But at least some these very smart people probably have reasonably smart children. Do these parents simply not understand that their kids are not getting the breath and depth of education that they could be getting in a public school? Or is the issue that not all the bright kids can get into the magnets (elementary and middle), and therefore the parents who are able to are sending them to independent schools. What do people on this board think about the "best" independent schools versus a good (but not magnet) Montgomery Country middle school and high school? [/quote]

This is a good question. I once read that there is more buyer-beware in the private sector than in the public schools. Studies have implied that good private schools are probably a little better than good public schools. (At any other level, public is probably better. That is that average or bad private schools are probably worse than average or bad public schools).
The problem is, how do we decide which schools are good. Tuition and admission rates are not necessarily good indicators. Teacher qualifications, curricula, class sizes, and use of best practices are some better indicators.
That said, too many parents look at schools like the big 3 and assume that all is well, which is dangerous. I am a bit concerned about some of the test scores in the big 3 not being higher. After they screen the students by IQ and get older kids, I would expect much greater differences in scores, not some 20 to 40 points above say Whitman which is a school that has its share of below average and disruptive kids.
I have a child at a MC private school which is one of the better ones mentioned on this board. I speak to some teachers who work in the public schools then come and moonlight in after care programs in our private school. They say, as a previous poster mentioned, that there are almost no kids with academic problems in our private school, that you might encounter in public school. (I actually see that as a draw back and would welcome academic diversity). They say that the kids in our private school are more teachable, seem to catch on faster. That academic talent seems to free the students up to pursue other activities in more depth, like sports and music and so on.

In my research about school quality, there are only two schools (IMHO) here that really stand out, that I believe are superior based on the criteria that I mentioned before, The British School (Lower school), and Holton Arms. However, neither school is perfect. My child does not attend either, and never will (logistical issues).

[Anonymous]

We went into an independent school thinking that the cohort would be superior for lack of a better word. It is not a particularly advanced group and won't be until perhaps the 4th or 6th grade when admissions opens up again. At the moment, there are a lot of staff and legacy kids, and they really do take up a lot of teacher time bringing them up to speed and managing their behavior.

I completely, totally agree that this is our experience as well. I am really dismayed at the, um, cohort as a large group. Our private school is kinda small and DC is in 1st grade.

Looking more closely, the, ah, issues with the cohort are almost exclusively younger siblings, legacies and a couple of kids who belong to groups that are traditionally under-represented in independent schools. DC is placed in the more advanced group for math, reading, writer workshop, and that's great. But that still leaves social studies, music, foreign language, etc. which seem really, surprisingly slow to me and DH and to DC, too.

We will try hard to switch schools at the next big expansion year; living in a house in MoCo does not suit our needs or wishes at all, rigorous and differentiated as the classes may be. In the only neighborhood we'd consider, the homes start at about $2M, never go on the market, etc.

[Anonymous]

So my middle schooler was at a Mont Co ES magnet (the oldest one) for 4 and 5, and is now is at a Big 3 (and considered the MC middle school magnet. So I have a direct comparison. All are excellent, but there are differences.
At magnet, cohort was phenomenal. Teachers just incredible, so committed. Kids -so very smart. Mostly 1st generation kids (largely Chinese heritage), and the culture of school was to pile on a huge amount of homework that was very challenge, which accepted by the families. I didn't like the HW; loved the level of challenge. Math acceleration standard, and DC went to the local MS with the most advanced group. The teacher was mediocre. Science - wonderful despite crappy facility. Language arts - really good, but pretty rote. No foreign langauge, as standard.

Now at Big 3: Cohort more varied, and generally less strong. Mostly children of professionals, many elites. Math pretty weak. Science really very good. Language arts and history - really superb. Teachers - I can't imagine any better at a private school.

In sum: both experiences have been great, child happy, learning a lot, each with unique strengths. Take your pick - can't go wrong, it seems to me.

We did't go to TPMS because my feeling was that the emphasis on math-science AT THE EXPENSE OF LANGUAGE ARTS is not what we wanted. DC still does lots of math on own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So my middle schooler was at a Mont Co ES magnet (the oldest one) for 4 and 5, and is now is at a Big 3 (and considered the MC middle school magnet. So I have a direct comparison. All are excellent, but there are differences.
At magnet, cohort was phenomenal. Teachers just incredible, so committed. Kids -so very smart. Mostly 1st generation kids (largely Chinese heritage), and the culture of school was to pile on a huge amount of homework that was very challenge, which accepted by the families. I didn't like the HW; loved the level of challenge. Math acceleration standard, and DC went to the local MS with the most advanced group. The teacher was mediocre. Science - wonderful despite crappy facility. Language arts - really good, but pretty rote. No foreign langauge, as standard.

Now at Big 3: Cohort more varied, and generally less strong. Mostly children of professionals, many elites. Math pretty weak. Science really very good. Language arts and history - really superb. Teachers - I can't imagine any better at a private school.

In sum: both experiences have been great, child happy, learning a lot, each with unique strengths. Take your pick - can't go wrong, it seems to me.

We did't go to TPMS because my feeling was that the emphasis on math-science AT THE EXPENSE OF LANGUAGE ARTS is not what we wanted. DC still does lots of math on own.

PP: Are you able to reveal which Big 3 school your child is in? The math assessment, "pretty weak", worries me.

[Anonymous]

Let's admit, at 30K a year, these schools will be under a lot of scrutiny. They will be examined very closely from all angles. Are they up for it? The questions are going to keep coming, I hope they have the answers.

[Anonymous]

To answer the question in much broader terms, yes this is a problem, and it's one reason why the US isn't producing top scholars in math. Math instruction in the US, compared to the rest of the world, is weak, and my impression is that it is weaker still in independent schools. I don't think math is a selling point for independent school parents the way in-depth language arts and history and art and music and theater are. A lot of math instruction looks dry and drill-like, and that's part of what parents are trying to avoid by going private. I just toured privates and I was amazed by how frankly I was told that they rarely differentiate in math ("because our curriculum is so rich"). Didn't like it, but for me it wasn't a dealbreaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We did't go to TPMS because my feeling was that the emphasis on math-science AT THE EXPENSE OF LANGUAGE ARTS is not what we wanted. DC still does lots of math on own.

PP: Are you able to reveal which Big 3 school your child is in? The math assessment, "pretty weak", worries me.

Let me put it this way - we looked carefully at all of the Big 3, and they all were "pretty weak" (from the point of view of being able and willing to support more advanced math. Where we are, the math teaching is good at grade level (or somewhat above). So it would depend on the child and where s/he is more than the quality of teaching. Hope that helps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We went into an independent school thinking that the cohort would be superior for lack of a better word. It is not a particularly advanced group and won't be until perhaps the 4th or 6th grade when admissions opens up again. At the moment, there are a lot of staff and legacy kids, and they really do take up a lot of teacher time bringing them up to speed and managing their behavior.

I completely, totally agree that this is our experience as well. I am really dismayed at the, um, cohort as a large group. Our private school is kinda small and DC is in 1st grade.

Looking more closely, the, ah, issues with the cohort are almost exclusively younger siblings, legacies and a couple of kids who belong to groups that are traditionally under-represented in independent schools. DC is placed in the more advanced group for math, reading, writer workshop, and that's great. But that still leaves social studies, music, foreign language, etc. which seem really, surprisingly slow to me and DH and to DC, too.

We will try hard to switch schools at the next big expansion year; living in a house in MoCo does not suit our needs or wishes at all, rigorous and differentiated as the classes may be. In the only neighborhood we'd consider, the homes start at about $2M, never go on the market, etc.

My second DC is one minute younger than my first DC - and clearly missed out on all the smart genes. As a cohort, first DC is clearly suffering. To make matters worse, first DC is friends with some legacy and "traditionally under-represented in independent schools" children. How can we and first DC surmount this triple whammy? I am open to any suggestions. For example, should we: put second DC up for adoption, ask children if their parents also attended the school before we accept playdates, or request that DC not eat lunch next to children who appear "to belong to groups that are traditionally under-represented in independent schools"?

Again, we are open to any suggestions. TIA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the question is silly. We went into an independent school thinking that the cohort would be superior for lack of a better word. It is not a particularly advanced group and won't be until perhaps the 4th or 6th grade when admissions opens up again. At the moment, there are a lot of staff and legacy kids, and they really do take up a lot of teacher time bringing them up to speed and managing their behavior.

Yes, those teachers are often dragged down by their own children.

What is amazing about the above tone is that, for some reason, staff and legacy kids should NOT be there. BS!! For one, private school teachers generally get paid less than their public school colleagues, and no doubt are getting paid less than most of the parents who send their kids to private schools. As a recruitment and retention benefit (among others), teachers should have the opportunity to have their children attend if the school chooses to provide that benefit. We should welcome that!! For two, the notion that you are "entitled" to send your kid to some "top" private school simply because he or she has scored well on some WIPPSI, WISC or SSAT test is ridiculous. The entitlement mentality is mind boggling. Legacy kids and their families are far more likely to provide long-term financial AND other benefits to the private school than a family whose child attends for a few years before moving on to the next phase. Moreover, legacy families are one of the means to preserve the school culture, which presumably is at least one reason why you are interested in the school. At the end, it is obviously a balancing act, between paying families and FA families, between new and old blood, between super smart and reasonably smart kids, etc. The school has the right to make that balancing act.