Capitol Hill - middle school and beyond?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ And I am perfectly willing to admit that I will be disappointed if my kids can't get into any of the above schools or a smattering of foreign options. Of course, there may be a good reason they want to go somewhere else, but they should be able to get into one of the above. That's a reasonable expectation for a smart UMC kid from a very educated family w/ all of the priviledge that goes along with those factors & who has no particular academic challenges. Obviously folks in other positions will have different expectations.

I think you are in for a rude awakening, Entitlement. This is no longer a reasonable expectation; in fact, it’s an embarrassing presumption.

Agree to disagree. Maybe our definition of smart or educated family is different. I will absolutely be disappointed if my kids can't get into UCSB/UCD/UFlorida/Vanderbilt/WUSTL/Notre Dame/Emory & I'm not embarassed about that. It's not about entitlement. They're not entitled to go to those schools. I will be disappointed if they don't perform well enough to deserve to.

Like I said: you are in for a rude awakening.

I doubt it. Honestly. 3 kids on our street headed to these schools this Fall. These are bright kids, but no secret sauce. If I was taking HYPS, I'd agree with you. But lots of these schools are nearly 90% predictable based on straight grades/stats (e.g., Michigan, UVA, all but the top 2 UCs). You're taking the very true lessons of HYPS admissions these days and applying them too far down the pecking order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

Ivy+?

Let me guess. Tulane?

No one would ever call Tulane Ivy+. MIT. Cal Tech. UChicago. Northwestern. Georgetown. Hopkins. All potentially in the convo depending on how much work the plus is doing. Tulane? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

Ivy+?

Let me guess. Tulane?

No one would ever call Tulane Ivy+. MIT. Cal Tech. UChicago. Northwestern. Georgetown. Hopkins. All potentially in the convo depending on how much work the plus is doing. Tulane? No.

Your kid is definitely at Tulane.

No shame in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

Ivy+?

Let me guess. Tulane?

No one would ever call Tulane Ivy+. MIT. Cal Tech. UChicago. Northwestern. Georgetown. Hopkins. All potentially in the convo depending on how much work the plus is doing. Tulane? No.

Your kid is definitely at Tulane.

No shame in it.

Sorry if there was confusion. I’m the PP, but it’s not my anecdote.

[Anonymous]

NP. We're friends with two families who left BASIS for SH, one after 6th grade, the other after 7th. Both students were admitted to Walls from SH and now attend as 9th graders. Our kid wasn't admitted to Walls from BASIS despite having a qualifying GPA. Kid refused to return to BASIS for high school, so now we pay for a parochial school for 9th grade, a stretch for us financially.

My message is think twice before you diss SH these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

SH? Lol. You must be smoking something.

I wish I was smoking something in having discovered that DCPS rewards loyalty where Walls admissions goes EotP. Our Hill friends with kids at Jefferson or SH all cracked Walls this year. None of our Hill friends at BASIS who applied to Walls did and neither did we. Arghhh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. We're friends with two families who left BASIS for SH, one after 6th grade, the other after 7th. Both students were admitted to Walls from SH and now attend as 9th graders. Our kid wasn't admitted to Walls from BASIS despite having a qualifying GPA. Kid refused to return to BASIS for high school, so now we pay for a parochial school for 9th grade, a stretch for us financially.

My message is think twice before you diss SH these days.

Yes. We are a family that values education, both parents were NMSF, and I would absolutely send my kids to SH, over Basis, for a variety of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

SH? Lol. You must be smoking something.

I wish I was smoking something in having discovered that DCPS rewards loyalty where Walls admissions goes EotP. Our Hill friends with kids at Jefferson or SH all cracked Walls this year. None of our Hill friends at BASIS who applied to Walls did and neither did we. Arghhh.

So are you saying that getting into Walls is more about loyalty than actual qualifications? If so, what does that say about the quality of Walls itself?

[Anonymous]

What is says to me is there too many qualified Hill applicants for too few spots at Walls. I try not to judge a book by its cover/school. We've known some of the Jefferson and SH kids who cracked Walls since they were tiny tots. These kids are v. bright, self-starters who read widely and work a grade level or two ahead in math. Just saying that there's no question that DCPS offers preferential treatment in admissions to Walls to families who have stuck with DCPS. Obviously not a problem if your kids like BASIS or another charter but it became a problem for us after our straight-A-BASIS-student wanted out (which we didn't see coming).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

SH? Lol. You must be smoking something.

I wish I was smoking something in having discovered that DCPS rewards loyalty where Walls admissions goes EotP. Our Hill friends with kids at Jefferson or SH all cracked Walls this year. None of our Hill friends at BASIS who applied to Walls did and neither did we. Arghhh.

So are you saying that getting into Walls is more about loyalty than actual qualifications? If so, what does that say about the quality of Walls itself?

I think it’s clear that the PP is working from an extremely small and non-random data set. I would be cautious about drawing any conclusions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is says to me is there too many qualified Hill applicants for too few spots at Walls. I try not to judge a book by its cover/school. We've known some of the Jefferson and SH kids who cracked Walls since they were tiny tots. These kids are v. bright, self-starters who read widely and work a grade level or two ahead in math. Just saying that there's no question that DCPS offers preferential treatment in admissions to Walls to families who have stuck with DCPS. Obviously not a problem if your kids like BASIS or another charter but it became a problem for us after our straight-A-BASIS-student wanted out (which we didn't see coming).

Did you also try applying to Banneker, lottery to JR, or other options?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the nicest things about sending kids to Latin is that Latin parents aren’t DCUM posters.

Ironic

Not really, as I don't have kids old enough to send to Latin. My neighbor told me this, and seeing this thread, I see what she means.

I think some of this is parent self-selection. BASIS has more hyperacheiving Type A parents who want their kids to be the same & are more likely to have kids capable of being the same. Latin parents tend to be a bit more laid back about academics. Latin seems like a lovely, well-run school where kids are happy, but I look at the college outcomes and cringe. Why is virtually no one getting into the kind of school my DH & I went to? BASIS seems to have many issues, but some kids are getting into such schools. Most normal, laid back parents rank Latin over BASIS given everything else... I'd love to be one of those parents. BUT... I have this decision to make very soon & I'm not sure I can be.

Because times have changed and the college landscape has changed. It's a generational thing, it's not just Latin. The kids I interview for my alma mater come from all different schools, are 1000x better than I ever was, and don't get in.

That doesn't change the fact that SOME of them come from BASIS and virtually none seem to come from Latin. I don't disagree at all that it's much harder to get into such schools these days. Absolutely true.

Nonsense. Latin had a Princeton admit this year. BASIS had zero 2023 Ivy admits. They got one into CalTech and one into Johns Hopkins though.

There is something wrong with Basis. With how hard they are pushing the kids and their big talk about rigor, they should be getting Ivy/MIT/Stanford admits, and the fact that their aren't is concerning. Something is wrong with their model, and their execution.

I have no dog in this fight, but what does this even mean? Why must something be "wrong" based on those statistics? Said differently, why is that the metric? I see similar comments on DCUM about Basis and it really seems like Basis is one of those schools people love to hate for some reason. I'm not saying it's a perfect school and some of the criticism it receives is arguably justified, but this particular complaint misses the mark. If we are going to claim something is "wrong" at schools based on poor statistics, I would expect as much ire directed at other schools with poor statistics--for example, DCI which has abysmal PARCC and IB scores. Or pick any number of charter or DPCS schools where most of the kids aren't at grade level (there are a LOT).

It's just an odd observation: the one school that openly aims for rigor get bashed repeatedly on this board for not reaching certain goals that some people claim demonstrate rigor. Instead of embracing rigor while pushing to improve areas of legit criticism, the default on here is to tout lower-performing schools and claim that kids will be more well-rounded and "Larla will simply fall in with the advanced cohort and be just fine anyway." I mean, maybe she will, sure. But it seems like a gamble if most of the kids aren't at grade level.

Again, I have no dog in this fight but it's kind of an interesting observation.

You can't have had a child at BASIS. Their admins preach the gospel of rigor, geared at launching seniors to the country's most highly competitive colleges, ad nauseam from the get go. Families are pushed to sacrifice to make the grade, starting with long evenings of MS HW and 7th grade algebra for all. Then, whoops, not a single senior is admitted to a solitary Ivy. Embracing rigor while improving areas of legit criticism sounds good to me. Problem is the BASIS MO is shut up, do as you're told for 8 years and Ivy Plus schools will be within reach. Our skepticism and dislike is warranted.

They must have changed their approach. I went to ALL of the open houses, shadow days, etc. and heard (and am still hearing) ALL of the preaching. I'm getting all of the marketing emails. The focus isn't on "highly competitive colleges" but rather on the number of students who get merit aid in college. Is that something to preach about? I don't know, and I don't really care about that particular metric, but the school seems to. I haven't heard a single thing along the lines of "do this and you'll get into an Ivy Plus schools."

But if that's the message you received, and your kid didn't get into an Ivy Plus, I can see why you'd be upset. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether having homework in middle school is a bad thing.

My eldest did get into an Ivy+, from the private we left BASIS for. Maybe we can agree that having 3, 4 even 5 hours of homework a night in middle school on a regular basis is a bad thing. That was the story when we were at BASIS. I've heard that there isn't as much HW there these days.

I don't think Hill parents are upset, they're simply less prone to drink the BASIS Kool-Aid than they were a decade back. They're no longer bowled over the wonder of Olga/Michael Block's febrile dream of reforming K-12 ed. despite lacking experience as educators. SH is looking better all the time.

SH? Lol. You must be smoking something.

Lady needs to get off the pipe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is says to me is there too many qualified Hill applicants for too few spots at Walls. I try not to judge a book by its cover/school. We've known some of the Jefferson and SH kids who cracked Walls since they were tiny tots. These kids are v. bright, self-starters who read widely and work a grade level or two ahead in math. Just saying that there's no question that DCPS offers preferential treatment in admissions to Walls to families who have stuck with DCPS. Obviously not a problem if your kids like BASIS or another charter but it became a problem for us after our straight-A-BASIS-student wanted out (which we didn't see coming).

I'm a little surprised by this comment. My kids' cohort at BASIS always talk badly about BASIS and how much they don't like it and want to leave in high school. These are bright kids too so it's not that the school is too hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is says to me is there too many qualified Hill applicants for too few spots at Walls. I try not to judge a book by its cover/school. We've known some of the Jefferson and SH kids who cracked Walls since they were tiny tots. These kids are v. bright, self-starters who read widely and work a grade level or two ahead in math. Just saying that there's no question that DCPS offers preferential treatment in admissions to Walls to families who have stuck with DCPS. Obviously not a problem if your kids like BASIS or another charter but it became a problem for us after our straight-A-BASIS-student wanted out (which we didn't see coming).

Did you also try applying to Banneker, lottery to JR, or other options?

This. Also, I think ITS ends up sending a good number of kids to Walls and Banneker, despite being a charter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. We're friends with two families who left BASIS for SH, one after 6th grade, the other after 7th. Both students were admitted to Walls from SH and now attend as 9th graders. Our kid wasn't admitted to Walls from BASIS despite having a qualifying GPA. Kid refused to return to BASIS for high school, so now we pay for a parochial school for 9th grade, a stretch for us financially.

My message is think twice before you diss SH these days.

Wondering if you'd share what schools you looked at for your kid. We have an 8th grader and are trying to figure out plan a and b and c. We cannot afford big 3 type schools.