Beauvoir - what do you like? What don't you like?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep, as an adult, most people (and employers) do not care AT ALL where you went to pre-k. And no one, outside of a very small circle in the DC vacinity, even know Beauvoir exists. So this game of establishing exactly "how esteemed" a lower elementary school is...well, it's kind of nauseating. The idea that your experience in the first grade is going to set the tone for your entire life of learning, is a little reaching.

Spoken with the confidence of the ignorant. Neuropsychology continues to find more and more evidence that Aristotle's quote,"Give me a child until he is seven, and I will show you the man," is correct. About 80% of the neural wiring gets laid down between birth to 7. So, yes, propensities for learning and the tone for your entire life is largely set by 2nd grade. There is the remaining 20% that is not complete until late adolescence for women, late 20s for men. There is also a degree of neuroplasticity that exists throughout life, but it is limited, despite Daniel Amen's inflated claims to the contrary. So, yeah, early childhood is pretty important.

The amount of energy you're investing in how "nauseating" this "game" is suggests you're somewhat unbalanced yourself. Why should you care? It's an anonymous forum that contains some of the excrescence of DC. Why do you care so much what others think or believe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep, as an adult, most people (and employers) do not care AT ALL where you went to pre-k. And no one, outside of a very small circle in the DC vacinity, even know Beauvoir exists. So this game of establishing exactly "how esteemed" a lower elementary school is...well, it's kind of nauseating. The idea that your experience in the first grade is going to set the tone for your entire life of learning, is a little reaching.

Plus, this is all assuming that Beauvoir or any of these privates for that matter, provide a demonstrably better education in the first place. Which is questionable, at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, as an adult, most people (and employers) do not care AT ALL where you went to pre-k. And no one, outside of a very small circle in the DC vacinity, even know Beauvoir exists. So this game of establishing exactly "how esteemed" a lower elementary school is...well, it's kind of nauseating. The idea that your experience in the first grade is going to set the tone for your entire life of learning, is a little reaching.

Plus, this is all assuming that Beauvoir or any of these privates for that matter, provide a demonstrably better education in the first place. Which is questionable, at best.

If you are not acquainted what it takes to provide a better education, all schools look the same. For those of us who do have some knowledge in this area, it is easy to distinguish the better schools from the not so good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

Wow. You sound terribly insecure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

Bitter much. Sounds like you toured, applied and didn't get in. LOL. Either that or you are a flat out liar. Impersonal was definitely NOT Beauvoir. Too big? It's a 7:1 ratio. The school is beautiful. Inside and out. If there is any criticism about the facilities it would be that it lacks a theater. But why would a PK-3 school need a full size theater anyway? Oh and spare me the "kids getting counseled out" thing...70% of the class feeds into STA/NCS and the remaining 30% go to their 1st or 2nd many going to other Big 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

What is Sheridan? Is it a preschool? Where is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

If attending Sheridan will make me as bitter as you, I will take Beauvoir over Sheridan any day!

[Anonymous]

We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing pk-12s. I'm talking more like St Patrick's, Sheridan. NPS. Elementary type schools where your tuition doesn't subsidize more expensive middle and upper school facilities. And compared to these K-8/6 schools, Beauvoir is A LOT more expensive.

Those schools are not on Beauvoir's level. Beauvoir would be an A school and those would be B level schools.

This attitude--not typical, fortunately--is what I don't like.

+1

So you disagree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard than the other mentioned schools? You may not like that some are willing to be honest about it, but it doesn't make it not true.

NP. Definitely agree that Beauvoir is held in higher regard . . . by Beauvoir parents.

This is true. But it is also true that if you asked a random selection of DC parents to rank the schools (as opposed to parents of children at these schools), Beauvoir would be ranked higher than St. Patricks, Sheridan, or NPS.

Beauvoir has had a consistently high quality of education for a very long time. I understand NPS in recent years has gotten stronger. Have not heard the same about St. Patricks. Sheridan's reputation is that it's a warm and supportive school with mediocre academics.

A school that has been around since 1933, consistently providing strong elementary education is simply going to have a stronger reputation than one that has been variable or has only recently begun to have a strong program. It's like comparing Harvard to Middlebury. In recent years, Middlebury has become a much stronger college. However, it will take years (if ever) to compete with Harvard in reputation.



And it's ranked higher because it had a teacher who made it to the FBI's most wanted list?? Beauvoir isn't viewed as the top school by me. I will say that it has the best playground I've ever seen. When I toured, it felt like an impersonal factory and it seemed like some of the teacher combinations were better than others. I didn't like how large it. Let's be clear: it's a status symbol as much as anything else. It's some seal of approval that some can use to congratulate themselves. Is it a good school? Sure. It's it academically better than any others? It's don't think so. If you look at where Beauvoir alum go, it's the to same places as the NPS, ST. Pat's and Sheridan alum. In fact, some Beauvoir kids transfer in to some of those schools. Gasp.

Additionally, because Beauvoir is so big, you could find your kid getting counseled out of the cathedral schools. Not every kid there is going to make and what a blow to the ego when your kid might have to slum it in a non big 3.

And, btw, Sheridan was founded in 1927 and count Al Gore as an alum. Finally, there is a director of one of the commonly mentioned top three preschools - that sends a lot of kids to Beauvoir - who makes no bones about Sheridan being one the best schools out there.


And, a final point, as we know the lifers tend to be the lower performers in high school. So that would mean all the kids coming from what the pp describes as "lesser" school are the academic rock stars in the end. I wonder how that could be possible, given that the kids are coming from inferior academic environments?

Wow. You sound terribly insecure.

Really? How so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

Many new to schools get very excited and brag about the school and think it is great. We used to do that too! Don't take it so seriously. Yes sure we like Beauvoir but don't think it is perfect and certainly don't go around bragging about it. Many good schools in DC. To the Beauvoir parent that is bragging on here - please stop because it makes us all look like a bunch of asses!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

None of the "mean" is coming from Beauvoir parents. It's almost all from people who don't attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

Really? Yours was one of the more mean-spirited posts I've seen recently on this board. Only someone who is bitter and insecure needs to respond in that way. If you are taken aback by it, it suggests either disingenuousness or a real lack of social awareness.

We are a Beauvoir family and are very happy with our choice. To get back to the original topic, OP, it's a great school. We love the community. We love the sense of caring that the faculty and staff communicate to the children. We love the emphasis on values, social skills, and what it means to be part of a community. We love the enrichments offered after school. We love that the teachers just go the extra mile. We love that our children get upset when they have to miss school. We love that they see school as a fun place to be. We love that they love learning. We love Mrs. Vorenberg. We love the thoughtfulness that goes into the classroom. We love the exceptional teachers. Welcome to Beauvoir!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

Many new to schools get very excited and brag about the school and think it is great. We used to do that too! Don't take it so seriously. Yes sure we like Beauvoir but don't think it is perfect and certainly don't go around bragging about it. Many good schools in DC. To the Beauvoir parent that is bragging on here - please stop because it makes us all look like a bunch of asses!?

Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We didn't apply to Beauvoir and our children don't attend Sheridan. I cited it as an example because a smug poster said it had mediocre academics. I'm sure Sheridan parents can amplify.

Frankly, I am taken aback by the mean spiritedness.

Many new to schools get very excited and brag about the school and think it is great. We used to do that too! Don't take it so seriously. Yes sure we like Beauvoir but don't think it is perfect and certainly don't go around bragging about it. Many good schools in DC. To the Beauvoir parent that is bragging on here - please stop because it makes us all look like a bunch of asses!?

My intent was not to brag. I was simply pointing out it is a great school and yes we do love it. If people take my speaking highly of the school of our choice and some blight on theirs that's their issue and not mine.