NCS Parents - "I wish I had known x" type advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

If the prevailing culture at NCS is that in order to succeed in the world "you must be better than the boys" then many of the girls are being led to failure. Just as their female counterparts, men are passed over for promotion on a regular basis. Being passed over for partner at a law firm is just as devestating to a man as it is to a woman, but the man doesn't have the excuse of a "glass ceiling". Spending four years at an Ivy League school just to put on your resume that you graduated from Harvard, Columbia, Cornell, etc. may not get you the job you want. If you want to be a meteorologist, a degree from the University of Oklahoma will be better received; if you want to be a photographer, a degree from the Corcoran or from Maryland School for the Arts may give you a leg up over Harvard or Princeton. The female doctor who helps deliver your baby or treats your flu may have been a graduate of some school you've never heard of. There is no disgrace in not going to an Ivy.

Nurturing means finding and bringing out of each individual their strengths and encouraging and enabling them to follow their passion. If "being the best you can be at what you want to be" is not the philosophy at NCS, than some changes need to be made. It is too good a school not to bring out the best in ALL its women. Encouraging each student to pursue her passion is more nurturing than setting false goals (Ivy League) as the road to success.

Maybe that's a lesson they can learn from their brother school.

I really don't think the school sets a goal, either impliciitly or eplicitly, that everybody has to go to an Ivy League school or that the "right" college is all that matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

So, what were the non-nurturing elements that were a result of school policies? (I'm not the person who thought you are a Holton mother.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

So, what were the non-nurturing elements that were a result of school policies? (I'm not the person who thought you are a Holton mother.)

In my DD's graduating class of 77, many of her friends left NCS feeling emotionally empty. The number one non-nurturing element that's at the school's core is a narrowly defined meaning of excellence that only a small percentage of girls will meet, the rest tend to feel that they don't matter. Non-nurturing elements that are in short supply and that are absolutely essential in any healthy, learning environment: encouragement, care and support (particularly in the classroom). You would expect that most girl's strengths and passions would naturally bloom in a school with such great resources; however encouragement, care and support is of short supply.

Fortunately, my DD was supported by her STA & NCS sports coaches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

So, what were the non-nurturing elements that were a result of school policies? (I'm not the person who thought you are a Holton mother.)

In my DD's graduating class of 77, many of her friends left NCS feeling emotionally empty. The number one non-nurturing element that's at the school's core is a narrowly defined meaning of excellence that only a small percentage of girls will meet, the rest tend to feel that they don't matter. Non-nurturing elements that are in short supply and that are absolutely essential in any healthy, learning environment: encouragement, care and support (particularly in the classroom). You would expect that most girl's strengths and passions would naturally bloom in a school with such great resources; however encouragement, care and support is of short supply.

Fortunately, my DD was supported by her STA & NCS sports coaches.

And my DD was not an athlete, so didn't get that support.

I don't think even the high achieving girls are particularly happy. Its all about meeting certain milestones and not about the love of learning. How enjoyable is that?

I think the school is leaderless. the head of the school is disengaged and its running on empty. Everyone is doing what they are supposed to do for "excellence" and the applications keep coming so they think they're pulling it off. They're ripping those girls off. They aren't happy, they aren't encouraged to treat each other with kindness (!), and as far as I can tell the administration doesn't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

I'm dearie and I think I misread your post, so my apologies. I'm the parent of a former NCS student as well and I agree with you.

[Anonymous]

My advice? Transfer from NCS to Madeira!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

So, what were the non-nurturing elements that were a result of school policies? (I'm not the person who thought you are a Holton mother.)

In my DD's graduating class of 77, many of her friends left NCS feeling emotionally empty. The number one non-nurturing element that's at the school's core is a narrowly defined meaning of excellence that only a small percentage of girls will meet, the rest tend to feel that they don't matter. Non-nurturing elements that are in short supply and that are absolutely essential in any healthy, learning environment: encouragement, care and support (particularly in the classroom). You would expect that most girl's strengths and passions would naturally bloom in a school with such great resources; however encouragement, care and support is of short supply.

Fortunately, my DD was supported by her STA & NCS sports coaches.

So you felt that basically the teachers were harsh/cold?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a current STA and NCS parent, I think the culture of NCS and other girls' schools whose mission is to develop strong women leaders must necessarily be less nurturing than that of STA and other boys' schools whose students have and will always have all the advantages of being male in a man's world. Girls and women simply must try harder, even competing magainst one another in a man's world with a (still) limited number leadership leadership positions for women, and that sad fact puts great pressure on high-school girls.

Besides Susan Rice any other NCS (distinguished) alumni who are world leaders or hold major leadership positions?

Less nurturing is a huge understatement!

I think this is Holton Mom.

No dearie, my DD is a NCS alum. She chose NCS over Holton.

So, what were the non-nurturing elements that were a result of school policies? (I'm not the person who thought you are a Holton mother.)

In my DD's graduating class of 77, many of her friends left NCS feeling emotionally empty. The number one non-nurturing element that's at the school's core is a narrowly defined meaning of excellence that only a small percentage of girls will meet, the rest tend to feel that they don't matter. Non-nurturing elements that are in short supply and that are absolutely essential in any healthy, learning environment: encouragement, care and support (particularly in the classroom). You would expect that most girl's strengths and passions would naturally bloom in a school with such great resources; however encouragement, care and support is of short supply.

Fortunately, my DD was supported by her STA & NCS sports coaches.

And my DD was not an athlete, so didn't get that support.

I don't think even the high achieving girls are particularly happy. Its all about meeting certain milestones and not about the love of learning. How enjoyable is that?

I think the school is leaderless. the head of the school is disengaged and its running on empty. Everyone is doing what they are supposed to do for "excellence" and the applications keep coming so they think they're pulling it off. They're ripping those girls off. They aren't happy, they aren't encouraged to treat each other with kindness (!), and as far as I can tell the administration doesn't care.

From what I see, the students ARE encouraged to treat each other with kindness -- in the chapel program, the peer leaders, etc. Is that not right? Is it not "taking"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

From what I see, the students ARE encouraged to treat each other with kindness -- in the chapel program, the peer leaders, etc. Is that not right? Is it not "taking"?

Its not enough. There is no leadership in the school creating a supportive atmosphere. Platitudes in chapel don't set a tone. The peer leader program helps the girls deal with the environment but it doesn't change the environment. Kindness is not encouraged. Mutual support is not encouraged. When an individual girl is struggling they may help her with her struggles but they never deal with the girls collectively. The parents encourage competitiveness and the teachers and administrators wring their hands over how much they don't like that but do absolutely nothing about it. Its only when you get the contrast of another school that you see how warped it is. I'm so sorry I sent my DD there.

[Anonymous]

Somehow my previous post looks unreadable so I'll repost:

Its not enough. There is no leadership in the school creating a supportive atmosphere. Platitudes in chapel don't set a tone. The peer leader program helps the girls deal with the environment but it doesn't change the environment. Kindness is not encouraged. Mutual support is not encouraged. When an individual girl is struggling they may help her with her struggles but they never deal with the girls collectively. The parents encourage competitiveness and the teachers and administrators wring their hands over how much they don't like that but do absolutely nothing about it. Its only when you get the contrast of another school that you see how warped it is. I'm so sorry I sent my DD there.

[Anonymous]

PPs who are disgruntled with NCS, did your child need more support or nurturing than the majority or would you say your child's experience was that of the majority? Similarly, would you say NCS was not a fit for your child specifically, or that NCS is not a good fit for the majority (any type of child)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow my previous post looks unreadable so I'll repost:

Its not enough. There is no leadership in the school creating a supportive atmosphere. Platitudes in chapel don't set a tone. The peer leader program helps the girls deal with the environment but it doesn't change the environment. Kindness is not encouraged. Mutual support is not encouraged. When an individual girl is struggling they may help her with her struggles but they never deal with the girls collectively. The parents encourage competitiveness and the teachers and administrators wring their hands over how much they don't like that but do absolutely nothing about it. Its only when you get the contrast of another school that you see how warped it is. I'm so sorry I sent my DD there.

Thanks for your thoughtful post. I used to teach at a co-Ed private school, not as strong academically -- different atmosphere, and I was just a rank-and-file teacher, but I admit to having trouble coming up with what a school can do if there is a highly ompetitive student and parent body. I like to think I personally was supportive, kind, and brought a good energy but, again, I'm not sure what works at the policy level for an institution.

[Anonymous]

NCS graduate I know: name dropper, social climber. loser. Also losing at social climbing. Liability to DH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PPs who are disgruntled with NCS, did your child need more support or nurturing than the majority or would you say your child's experience was that of the majority? Similarly, would you say NCS was not a fit for your child specifically, or that NCS is not a good fit for the majority (any type of child)?

Both. Kind of a canary in the coal mine thing. My DD needed more support and therefore the problems were much more obvious. But looking over her friends I see the same problems in less obvious forms.

I would love to hear from parents whose daughters have graduated and were happy with the school. The parents of younger girls will report their DDs are happy, mine was in younger years as well although I think I missed some issues that were already brewing in her class. What I've seen is that its the upper year, 10th, 11th and 12th grades when the unhappiness increases. Do any girls come out of NCS LOVING their school? I'm just curious.

And I don't mean alumns from previous decades. It was different back then.