Outplacement directors that speak in code or total silence; can anyone translate ?

[Anonymous]

14:27 again. BTW, I completely agree with you and others that an unresponsive or ineffective OD is a bad thing. If the OD is particularly bad, I'd probably complain about her to the school admin (trying to be as constructive as possible).

Where you and I part ways is that I'm less comfortable ascribing motivations to the OD since so much of the situation is a black box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:14:27 again. BTW, I completely agree with you and others that an unresponsive or ineffective OD is a bad thing. If the OD is particularly bad, I'd probably complain about her to the school admin (trying to be as constructive as possible).

Where you and I part ways is that I'm less comfortable ascribing motivations to the OD since so much of the situation is a black box.

It is nice to get a more balanced approach to things. Good job 14:27.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:14:27 again. BTW, I completely agree with you and others that an unresponsive or ineffective OD is a bad thing. If the OD is particularly bad, I'd probably complain about her to the school admin (trying to be as constructive as possible).

Where you and I part ways is that I'm less comfortable ascribing motivations to the OD since so much of the situation is a black box.

It is nice to get a more balanced approach to things. Good job 14:27.

It's awfully chummy in here.

[Anonymous]

Query: If you thought your kid might very likely struggle at (Sidwell/St. Albans/NCS/Holton/Potomac/insert fairly rigorous school here), would you still want the OD to help you get in? On the assumption, let's say, that your child might get stronger academically? Or that you could augment for tutors?

Or is the question wholly inapt, in that nobody thinks there kid would struggle when we are talking grade 3?