Sidwell tuition increase

[Anonymous]

I am also appalled at the yearly increase but I don't understand why every year there is a long discussion on Sidwell's increase and not the other schools. Are they released later? Is that why Sidwell always leads the pack for complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dispelling several myths perpetrated on this forum:

5. The majority of FA dollars go to families making more than $100k, with a significant portion going to families with incomes above $200k.
6. The majority of FA dollars go to residents of the suburban counties and not the district itself.

Ok. So Here is the problem and solution. The school should decrease FA to this group who making more than $100k/$200k, and admit more students who can full pay, thus decrease the need to increase tuition to current families. Hardly to see how could those above 100k / 200k families ( since it is a Large portion) all bring something unique to the school. Those students who were merely missed the admission “standard” but can full pay willl succeed at Sidwell, and likely will be more successful than those $100k/$200k FA recipients.

Ha! I love this! Let schools with strong educational reputations just serve the wealthy. Screw that long tradition of merit as a factor. Let's just go back to the days of finishing schools and gentleman's c's. If your parents were not craven enough to be Big Law partners, then you can accept mediocrity in all things.

And this is what Sidwell has become. I’m actually ashamed to be a Sidwell alum reading comments like these. And grateful my children went elsewhere.

Please. The drama here is so over the top. Not being able to afford Sidwell does not mean a life sentence of mediocrity. For goodness sake. And ashamed?? Silly. Sidwell has always been exclusive, even in your day. And it is currently doing a lot of great stuff with a pretty diverse group of kids. Not perfect but nothing is!

Right, but some of the parents posting here are representative of the evolving culture. Suggestions to cut FA so that they don’t have to pay what is a very modest tuition increase?

FA is the moral high ground. How dare you people have the idea of discussing cutting FA.

[Anonymous]

I have to admit I have stopped donating after all these yearly increases. I have no interest in contributing to the new unified school. It's a pay forward we will never see the benefit of and if anything it is a distraction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the 7M in FA, how much of that, in percentage, goes to academic high achievers and how much of that goes to athletic recruit? For athletic recruit, does most of that money go to football, soccer and lacrosse?

How much of the $7 million for FA actually comes from tuition dollars? Everyone assumes that's where it all comes from while in reality it's likely heavily funded by a draw from the endowment that has been earmarked for just this purpose as well as ongoing donations that are restricted for FA. It's the same thing for new building costs -- by and large they are not getting covered through tuition. Without seeing the full Sidwell budget laid out with all of the revenue sources accounted for, you are missing a lot of important information and shouldn't assume that reducing FA or foregoing new construction would have much impact on tuition.

To solve the money issue, you only have what is in (revenue) and what is out (cost). The board cannot control how much people are willing to donate. All they can control is either increasing tuition ( which you must pay if you want to stay) or decreasing cost. If many current families cannot afford the continued increase in tuition, why giving out such a large FA?

[Anonymous]

Sidwell has increasing expenses, some in areas of questionable merit.
The board is doing its best to maintain a healthy financial future. It seems confident that if family X leaves, family Y will step right in. It therefore has no concerns about an inability to fill classes.
But as a prior poster said, this approach is already affecting the student family population, and will continue to do so more seriously in the future. Less loyalty and more resentment of an institution that is becoming less distinguishable from its peers and already has, as Bryan Garman has said, a “Joy problem”, will affect the school significantly. Speaking of, what has BG done? He seems to be just another HOS who likes to schmooze with DC elites.

And yes, F the board and limousines they rode in on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These posts here makes me think that Sidwell doesn't love its middle class families and neither does the rest of the parent body.

Disagree. The school pays millions in financial aid so students from middle (and lower) class families can attend. What we are having is one or a handful of supposed full pay parents complaining about a 3.5% increase. Yes, it is a burden and yes, it will likely increase about the same each year. But complaining about it on this forum and opening the discussion to anonymous trolls to pile on isn't the right approach.

In my opinion, the right approach is to send a note to the head of school and request a meeting and discuss how the school is working to contain costs and what the options are for the family in question. If the family can show that the increase is too much of a financial burden, it is possible they can apply for FA for the difference in the rate increase. If the family cannot show that burden, then they will have to decide if the cost is worth it for their student(s) and family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have to admit I have stopped donating after all these yearly increases. I have no interest in contributing to the new unified school. It's a pay forward we will never see the benefit of and if anything it is a distraction.

So other people, decades ago, contributed money so your kid could have the faculty and campus that they enjoyed and you withhold for the future. That's lovely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell has increasing expenses, some in areas of questionable merit.
The board is doing its best to maintain a healthy financial future. It seems confident that if family X leaves, family Y will step right in. It therefore has no concerns about an inability to fill classes.
But as a prior poster said, this approach is already affecting the student family population, and will continue to do so more seriously in the future. Less loyalty and more resentment of an institution that is becoming less distinguishable from its peers and already has, as Bryan Garman has said, a “Joy problem”, will affect the school significantly. Speaking of, what has BG done? He seems to be just another HOS who likes to schmooze with DC elites.

And yes, F the board and limousines they rode in on.

So have an honest discussion - what are the increasing expenses of questionable merit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But as a prior poster said, this approach is already affecting the student family population, and will continue to do so more seriously in the future. Less loyalty and more resentment of an institution that is becoming less distinguishable from its peers and already has, as Bryan Garman has said, a “Joy problem”, will affect the school significantly.

What is this “joy problem”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to admit I have stopped donating after all these yearly increases. I have no interest in contributing to the new unified school. It's a pay forward we will never see the benefit of and if anything it is a distraction.

So other people, decades ago, contributed money so your kid could have the faculty and campus that they enjoyed and you withhold for the future. That's lovely.

+1. You’re right, PP. we are all benefiting from past giving as well as giving by alumni and others who aren’t even at Sidwell anymore. To not donate because you won’t reap a direct benefit is pretty selfish.

[Anonymous]

Not a Sidwell parent but we have looked at this school. I think parents as a whole need to publically push schools to manage finances better. The rise in tuition everywhere except Maret is just too much. I think many FA families are oblivious to how much other families have to pay and it almost takes on an us vs them attitude and this is not ideal. For every big law partner that people love ton”throw under the bus” there are two government workers paying full freight who should be able to manage tuition but are really unfairly stressed out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a Sidwell parent but we have looked at this school. I think parents as a whole need to publically push schools to manage finances better. The rise in tuition everywhere except Maret is just too much. I think many FA families are oblivious to how much other families have to pay and it almost takes on an us vs them attitude and this is not ideal. For every big law partner that people love ton”throw under the bus” there are two government workers paying full freight who should be able to manage tuition but are really unfairly stressed out.

Not disagreeing with the sentiment, but where exactly do you cut? The "institutional advancement" is self-financed, so not there. You don't want to cut any programs or opportunities for the kids, so no arts, music, sports, sciences etc cuts, so what is left? You want to pay the faculty a competitive salary and benefits, so....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These posts here makes me think that Sidwell doesn't love its middle class families and neither does the rest of the parent body.

Disagree. The school pays millions in financial aid so students from middle (and lower) class families can attend. What we are having is one or a handful of supposed full pay parents complaining about a 3.5% increase. Yes, it is a burden and yes, it will likely increase about the same each year. But complaining about it on this forum and opening the discussion to anonymous trolls to pile on isn't the right approach.

In my opinion, the right approach is to send a note to the head of school and request a meeting and discuss how the school is working to contain costs and what the options are for the family in question. If the family can show that the increase is too much of a financial burden, it is possible they can apply for FA for the difference in the rate increase. If the family cannot show that burden, then they will have to decide if the cost is worth it for their student(s) and family.

What we are having is one or a handful of supposed full pay parents complaining about a 3.5% increase.

How do u know that? It's interesting you know the number of families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These posts here makes me think that Sidwell doesn't love its middle class families and neither does the rest of the parent body.

Disagree. The school pays millions in financial aid so students from middle (and lower) class families can attend. What we are having is one or a handful of supposed full pay parents complaining about a 3.5% increase. Yes, it is a burden and yes, it will likely increase about the same each year. But complaining about it on this forum and opening the discussion to anonymous trolls to pile on isn't the right approach.

In my opinion, the right approach is to send a note to the head of school and request a meeting and discuss how the school is working to contain costs and what the options are for the family in question. If the family can show that the increase is too much of a financial burden, it is possible they can apply for FA for the difference in the rate increase. If the family cannot show that burden, then they will have to decide if the cost is worth it for their student(s) and family.

What we are having is one or a handful of supposed full pay parents complaining about a 3.5% increase.

How do u know that? It's interesting you know the number of families.

Clearly there is one or a small handful of "full pay" families that are commenting on this thread against the rate increase. What is your point?

[Anonymous]

The fact that you care nothing about people who are actually paying is sad. This is why full pay parents are tired of the increases. You don't even get a good feeling of contributing to a greater good. When people get to a point where they dismiss people who are actually paying for them why then it is sad.

[Anonymous]

I think the frustration for many families stems from having to pay 4% increases each year when they aren't seeing their salaries or other day to day expenses increases proportionally. That's why it raises suspicion as to Sidwell's methods.
You may disagree with those speaking up, but it is obviously a real concern.