Question about Woodward High School and Kensington/Garrett Park real estate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
1) Very intelligent children will have a better shot at maximizing their potential in a place where they can be appropriately challenged. Having a critical mass of peers with the same level of commitment is important to that end. (I'm not interested in whether it's better to be bottom 25% at WJ or average at Einstein -- I'll leave that to others to debate).

2) It's important to work towards accomplishments in as many domains as possible. So obviously focusing solely on career and damaging health is not strategic in the long run. Better to be as competent as possible in as many domains as possible.

3) I used the schools mentioned in the prior post. Did you get your reading comprehension skills from your years at Einstein? (Sorry, couldn't resist. If you are rude, expect rudeness back).

Smart peers who raise their hands and participate in class, like being in and going to class, etc. all very important to my high schooler as expressed by him.

Every high school has a critical mass of "smart peers."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
1) Very intelligent children will have a better shot at maximizing their potential in a place where they can be appropriately challenged. Having a critical mass of peers with the same level of commitment is important to that end. (I'm not interested in whether it's better to be bottom 25% at WJ or average at Einstein -- I'll leave that to others to debate).

2) It's important to work towards accomplishments in as many domains as possible. So obviously focusing solely on career and damaging health is not strategic in the long run. Better to be as competent as possible in as many domains as possible.

3) I used the schools mentioned in the prior post. Did you get your reading comprehension skills from your years at Einstein? (Sorry, couldn't resist. If you are rude, expect rudeness back).

I wasn't rude, I was asking questions. Also, since I went to a W-school, maybe they're not as good as you seem to think they are.

The problem with these posts is that they make many assumptions about Einstein and other DCC schools, with no actual experience and selectively-chosen data. People are entitled to their opinions, of course, but it's revealing that they assume the worst in order to justify their decisions. They're very one-sided.

But, PP who asked what people's concerns are, I guess you have them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
1) Very intelligent children will have a better shot at maximizing their potential in a place where they can be appropriately challenged. Having a critical mass of peers with the same level of commitment is important to that end. (I'm not interested in whether it's better to be bottom 25% at WJ or average at Einstein -- I'll leave that to others to debate).

2) It's important to work towards accomplishments in as many domains as possible. So obviously focusing solely on career and damaging health is not strategic in the long run. Better to be as competent as possible in as many domains as possible.

3) I used the schools mentioned in the prior post. Did you get your reading comprehension skills from your years at Einstein? (Sorry, couldn't resist. If you are rude, expect rudeness back).

Smart peers who raise their hands and participate in class, like being in and going to class, etc. all very important to my high schooler as expressed by him.

Every high school has a critical mass of "smart peers."

My kid is in a W. Believe it or, you still might be in a class without sometimes. Critical mass is a relative term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
1) Very intelligent children will have a better shot at maximizing their potential in a place where they can be appropriately challenged. Having a critical mass of peers with the same level of commitment is important to that end. (I'm not interested in whether it's better to be bottom 25% at WJ or average at Einstein -- I'll leave that to others to debate).

2) It's important to work towards accomplishments in as many domains as possible. So obviously focusing solely on career and damaging health is not strategic in the long run. Better to be as competent as possible in as many domains as possible.

3) I used the schools mentioned in the prior post. Did you get your reading comprehension skills from your years at Einstein? (Sorry, couldn't resist. If you are rude, expect rudeness back).

Explain to me why "very intelligent children" won't be as able to maximize their potential if they have PE, electives, and lunch with some kids who may be less academically successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I wasn't rude, I was asking questions.

I used the schools mentioned in the prior post and you told me I had "mediocre cognitive skills" for doing so. Apologize if you want, double down if you want, but don't play dumb.

Look, as for "selectively chosen data," SAT scores, AP test results, college admissions, dropout rates, crime rates in the local community didn't seem selectively chosen to me. I'm sure Silver Spring is a fine place to live, and if my housing budget was $500k, that's where I would live too. But it wasn't and so I didn't. I went to very selective schools, and I want my kids to be an environment where a critical mass (e.g., 10-25%) of kids have the ability, work ethic and desire to accomplish the same thing. It's lonely to be the only kid shooting for Harvard at Wheaton High School.

As for the "it's actually harder to get in to a top college from a top high school" argument, it doesn't bother me. I had a friend from prep school who got wait-listed from top colleges and then "only" went to UMD. Where he got a 4.0 in the honors program. The reality is that the intense preparation in these competitive schools is beneficial regardless of what college the kid gets into. And yeah, it's stressful, but life can be stressful and learning to manage stress and make friends in a competitive environment is an important skill set. Whether they get in or not is actually less important that they are formed at an early age into being committed to maximizing their talents and abilities and find a peer group in which that behavior is normative.

We need people to be mechanics and hair dressers and cheerful front desk receptionists. That's all great and well and good. I wish them all the best. But my kids are capable of more and I have no shame at all in working hard and laying the groundwork to help them accomplish that. If you really think every MCPS high school is the same as every other for accomplishing that goal, give us your best arguments for why that's true. But if your question boils down to "what's wrong with being mediocre anyways" the answer is "nothing... if you are mediocre, but if you are capable of more it's a waste of your talent and one life on this earth."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I wasn't rude, I was asking questions.

I used the schools mentioned in the prior post and you told me I had "mediocre cognitive skills" for doing so. Apologize if you want, double down if you want, but don't play dumb.

Look, as for "selectively chosen data," SAT scores, AP test results, college admissions, dropout rates, crime rates in the local community didn't seem selectively chosen to me. I'm sure Silver Spring is a fine place to live, and if my housing budget was $500k, that's where I would live too. But it wasn't and so I didn't. I went to very selective schools, and I want my kids to be an environment where a critical mass (e.g., 10-25%) of kids have the ability, work ethic and desire to accomplish the same thing. It's lonely to be the only kid shooting for Harvard at Wheaton High School.

As for the "it's actually harder to get in to a top college from a top high school" argument, it doesn't bother me. I had a friend from prep school who got wait-listed from top colleges and then "only" went to UMD. Where he got a 4.0 in the honors program. The reality is that the intense preparation in these competitive schools is beneficial regardless of what college the kid gets into. And yeah, it's stressful, but life can be stressful and learning to manage stress and make friends in a competitive environment is an important skill set. Whether they get in or not is actually less important that they are formed at an early age into being committed to maximizing their talents and abilities and find a peer group in which that behavior is normative.

We need people to be mechanics and hair dressers and cheerful front desk receptionists. That's all great and well and good. I wish them all the best. But my kids are capable of more and I have no shame at all in working hard and laying the groundwork to help them accomplish that. If you really think every MCPS high school is the same as every other for accomplishing that goal, give us your best arguments for why that's true. But if your question boils down to "what's wrong with being mediocre anyways" the answer is "nothing... if you are mediocre, but if you are capable of more it's a waste of your talent and one life on this earth."

Wow.

https://mont.thesentinel.com/2018/01/19/wheaton-high-school-wins-maryland-science-bowl/

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-takes-first-place-in-ranking-on-college-preparedness-stem-career-readiness/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I wasn't rude, I was asking questions.

I used the schools mentioned in the prior post and you told me I had "mediocre cognitive skills" for doing so. Apologize if you want, double down if you want, but don't play dumb.

Look, as for "selectively chosen data," SAT scores, AP test results, college admissions, dropout rates, crime rates in the local community didn't seem selectively chosen to me. I'm sure Silver Spring is a fine place to live, and if my housing budget was $500k, that's where I would live too. But it wasn't and so I didn't. I went to very selective schools, and I want my kids to be an environment where a critical mass (e.g., 10-25%) of kids have the ability, work ethic and desire to accomplish the same thing. It's lonely to be the only kid shooting for Harvard at Wheaton High School.

As for the "it's actually harder to get in to a top college from a top high school" argument, it doesn't bother me. I had a friend from prep school who got wait-listed from top colleges and then "only" went to UMD. Where he got a 4.0 in the honors program. The reality is that the intense preparation in these competitive schools is beneficial regardless of what college the kid gets into. And yeah, it's stressful, but life can be stressful and learning to manage stress and make friends in a competitive environment is an important skill set. Whether they get in or not is actually less important that they are formed at an early age into being committed to maximizing their talents and abilities and find a peer group in which that behavior is normative.

We need people to be mechanics and hair dressers and cheerful front desk receptionists. That's all great and well and good. I wish them all the best. But my kids are capable of more and I have no shame at all in working hard and laying the groundwork to help them accomplish that. If you really think every MCPS high school is the same as every other for accomplishing that goal, give us your best arguments for why that's true. But if your question boils down to "what's wrong with being mediocre anyways" the answer is "nothing... if you are mediocre, but if you are capable of more it's a waste of your talent and one life on this earth."

Thank you for your perspective. I’m sorry your child had such a hard time at Wheaton and I hope they are doing better at their current school, whichever one it is. Best of luck with the Harvard application.

[Anonymous]

The argument that one needs to be in an expensive home, to go to a "top" high school, so their child will be with appropriately invested and intelligent peers feels elitist and racist and very sad.
You are short-changing yourself and your family. There is value to having peers of all backgrounds. Real, human value -- which has nothing to do with how much money you make or the schools you attended.
My kid is smart and strong enough to attend a DCC magnet High School, MC and Maryland and succeed -- but will probably be in a "good" college with YOUR kids. No red-shirting in Kindergarten, either (Malcolm Gladwell did a lot of aspirational and insecure parents and their average kids no favors.) We are white and comfortable and choose to live where we do for various reasons. We will be retired at 50.

We bought him a modest home in a "brown" part of the county at birth and rent it out. It will be paid off when he turns 18, when we will continue to use the rent to pay for whatever or wherever he goes next (assuming college, but who knows?). Later, we plan to sell it and with the other investments we have for him and the money he is already saving mowing yards can pay cash for a place in YOUR neighborhood. He does not know this. We have not told him and will not until later - probably upon getting a job after college graduation at the earliest. He is bilingual, and not because we speak a foreign language at home. It's because he works at it -- you know, with peers who want to challenge themselves. Etc.

There are different ways to advantage a child beyond an elite high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I wasn't rude, I was asking questions.

I used the schools mentioned in the prior post and you told me I had "mediocre cognitive skills" for doing so. Apologize if you want, double down if you want, but don't play dumb.

Look, as for "selectively chosen data," SAT scores, AP test results, college admissions, dropout rates, crime rates in the local community didn't seem selectively chosen to me. I'm sure Silver Spring is a fine place to live, and if my housing budget was $500k, that's where I would live too. But it wasn't and so I didn't. I went to very selective schools, and I want my kids to be an environment where a critical mass (e.g., 10-25%) of kids have the ability, work ethic and desire to accomplish the same thing. It's lonely to be the only kid shooting for Harvard at Wheaton High School.

As for the "it's actually harder to get in to a top college from a top high school" argument, it doesn't bother me. I had a friend from prep school who got wait-listed from top colleges and then "only" went to UMD. Where he got a 4.0 in the honors program. The reality is that the intense preparation in these competitive schools is beneficial regardless of what college the kid gets into. And yeah, it's stressful, but life can be stressful and learning to manage stress and make friends in a competitive environment is an important skill set. Whether they get in or not is actually less important that they are formed at an early age into being committed to maximizing their talents and abilities and find a peer group in which that behavior is normative.

We need people to be mechanics and hair dressers and cheerful front desk receptionists. That's all great and well and good. I wish them all the best. But my kids are capable of more and I have no shame at all in working hard and laying the groundwork to help them accomplish that. If you really think every MCPS high school is the same as every other for accomplishing that goal, give us your best arguments for why that's true. But if your question boils down to "what's wrong with being mediocre anyways" the answer is "nothing... if you are mediocre, but if you are capable of more it's a waste of your talent and one life on this earth."

Actually it is true. A really smart kid will do well at any MCPS school. We had neighbors who went to Sidwell and several other privates growing up. We went to pubic. While I can see many advantages to private we are all doing about the same. No one cares where you go to high school. But, keep telling yourself. Kids can do to the worst schools in SE and thrive.

[Anonymous]

You're going to buy your kid a house in a W neighborhood with cash from the rents of "brown people" (your words) and want to lecture me about racism and privilege. Lol, ok.

[Anonymous]

My tenants are not brown. Why not? I guess they were born that way. I was just making a point that you can invest in the places you turn your nose up at, you know -- like Kensington -- and help your child succeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My tenants are not brown. Why not? I guess they were born that way. I was just making a point that you can invest in the places you turn your nose up at, you know -- like Kensington -- and help your child succeed.

My tenants are a scientist at NIH and a professor at a high-ranking private university. Both PhDs. They are now looking to buy in Kensington because they love it. I'm just saying - there is another way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I wasn't rude, I was asking questions.

I used the schools mentioned in the prior post and you told me I had "mediocre cognitive skills" for doing so. Apologize if you want, double down if you want, but don't play dumb.

Look, as for "selectively chosen data," SAT scores, AP test results, college admissions, dropout rates, crime rates in the local community didn't seem selectively chosen to me. I'm sure Silver Spring is a fine place to live, and if my housing budget was $500k, that's where I would live too. But it wasn't and so I didn't. I went to very selective schools, and I want my kids to be an environment where a critical mass (e.g., 10-25%) of kids have the ability, work ethic and desire to accomplish the same thing. It's lonely to be the only kid shooting for Harvard at Wheaton High School.

As for the "it's actually harder to get in to a top college from a top high school" argument, it doesn't bother me. I had a friend from prep school who got wait-listed from top colleges and then "only" went to UMD. Where he got a 4.0 in the honors program. The reality is that the intense preparation in these competitive schools is beneficial regardless of what college the kid gets into. And yeah, it's stressful, but life can be stressful and learning to manage stress and make friends in a competitive environment is an important skill set. Whether they get in or not is actually less important that they are formed at an early age into being committed to maximizing their talents and abilities and find a peer group in which that behavior is normative.

We need people to be mechanics and hair dressers and cheerful front desk receptionists. That's all great and well and good. I wish them all the best. But my kids are capable of more and I have no shame at all in working hard and laying the groundwork to help them accomplish that. If you really think every MCPS high school is the same as every other for accomplishing that goal, give us your best arguments for why that's true. But if your question boils down to "what's wrong with being mediocre anyways" the answer is "nothing... if you are mediocre, but if you are capable of more it's a waste of your talent and one life on this earth."

Thank you for your perspective. I’m sorry your child had such a hard time at Wheaton and I hope they are doing better at their current school, whichever one it is. Best of luck with the Harvard application.

You handle their fragility with such wit. I love it!

-wheaton parent

[Anonymous]

>>>Thank you for your perspective. I’m sorry your child had such a hard time at Wheaton and I hope they are doing better at their current school, whichever one it is. Best of luck with the Harvard application.<<<


>>You handle their fragility with such wit. I love it!

-wheaton parent<<

ME, TOO. OMG.

[Anonymous]

The infighting between various gradations of middle class people in this thread is sad. Save that ire for the people who send all their three kids to St Albans or Holton Arms. You're all crabs in a (relatively comfortable) bucket.