College Counseling at Sidwell - One Year Later

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bringing up the GDS CCO isn't really helpful or relevant here. GDS students emerge from a pedagogical environment where they're used to self-advocating and becoming thought leaders, and they don't really need much assistance or direction from a CCO to make their applications stand out as unique from other applicants.

But at Sidwell, the CCO function is really important in helping the students craft unique narratives that differentiate themselves from other high-achievers that otherwise look a little more generic on paper. The administration needs to invest in making the department up to this critical task because these are typically great students who just need a little more guidance and help in finding their way and telling their stories.

translation:

GDS students emerge from GDS completely full of themselves and using ridiculous phrases like "thought leaders". They need no adult assistance to produce college applications that make themselves sound like the second coming of the Lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Sidwell actually published the matriculation data, it would help people realize that college admissions is not what it was 20 years ago and go a long way toward managing expectations. Keeping things of opaque makes it hard for both families and the school.

The school does a good job of letting everyone know that college admissions is not what it was 20 years ago. It is just that, last year, a parent or two were not willing to accept it for their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bringing up the GDS CCO isn't really helpful or relevant here. GDS students emerge from a pedagogical environment where they're used to self-advocating and becoming thought leaders, and they don't really need much assistance or direction from a CCO to make their applications stand out as unique from other applicants.

But at Sidwell, the CCO function is really important in helping the students craft unique narratives that differentiate themselves from other high-achievers that otherwise look a little more generic on paper. The administration needs to invest in making the department up to this critical task because these are typically great students who just need a little more guidance and help in finding their way and telling their stories.

translation:

GDS students emerge from GDS completely full of themselves and using ridiculous phrases like "thought leaders". They need no adult assistance to produce college applications that make themselves sound like the second coming of the Lord.

LOL +1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bringing up the GDS CCO isn't really helpful or relevant here. GDS students emerge from a pedagogical environment where they're used to self-advocating and becoming thought leaders, and they don't really need much assistance or direction from a CCO to make their applications stand out as unique from other applicants.

But at Sidwell, the CCO function is really important in helping the students craft unique narratives that differentiate themselves from other high-achievers that otherwise look a little more generic on paper. The administration needs to invest in making the department up to this critical task because these are typically great students who just need a little more guidance and help in finding their way and telling their stories.

translation:

GDS students emerge from GDS completely full of themselves and using ridiculous phrases like "thought leaders". They need no adult assistance to produce college applications that make themselves sound like the second coming of the Lord.

LOL +1

Also true at SFS. The students have been told this their entire lives.

[Anonymous]

It doesn’t matter. It’s more helpful to see the broad range of schools that kids end up going to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t matter. It’s more helpful to see the broad range of schools that kids end up going to.

All of the kids from all of these types of schools go to the same types of colleges. One doesn't need to be a college expert to figure out where. And often times, when there schools on the periphery of these lists, there is usually a special story - a specific major, more financial aid, a geographic area, that is part of the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then suggest it to the administration rather than complaining about it on an anonymous message board.

The administration is weak and terrible, as you surely know if you have 2 kids in US. The teachers are great but happy with the way things are.

+1. The upper school administration is incompetent. Teachers are great.

I agree that the faculty are great and about the administration. The dysfunction was in the college counseling office last year and the year before. One counselor was just plain incompetent. It took too long, but the admin finally showed him the door. The CCO director was too stubborn, refused to admit he had a staff problem, and grew increasingly frustrated and checked out. Now he’s gone, gone, Gonzaga. To the extent that the administration is to blame, they took too long to force changes, and they still need to provide additional resources to the CCO. But they did act in the end, and recruited back an excellent director to lead and rebuild the CCO.

It's quite the opposite. The administration is completely incompetent and the teachers (who I agree are top-notch) are all trying to figure out how to abandon the sinking ship. The administration (truly led by the current Assistant Head of School who is delusional - she believes that Sidwell is perfect in every way and will hear nothing to the contrary) is more concerned with Sidwell's image than they are with the well-being of the students or the faculty. Ask anyone who works there.

The majority of families thought that last year's CCO director, who is currently very successful and happy at Gonzaga, was a rockstar. The actual reason why he left was because he thought the US Principal was incompetent, and he no longer felt comfortable working for him. He voiced his concerns, but the administration did not listen. And the fact that he tried to stick up for one of his employees and to help him perform better in his job instead of just getting rid of him, I find to be commendable. The "excellent" director that they recruited back was originally asked to leave because she was spending too much time on her outside consulting practice and not enough time on working with the Sidwell students. They were grasping at straws and offered her a boatload of money to come back for a year. Funny how they asked her to leave and then 3 years later begged her to come back.

The administration treats the CCO with such little respect, the only CC left from last year has now resigned - and broken her contract. The woosies at the school are not going to announce this until the middle of December - after EA and ED decisions come out. I am sure they are scrambling to replace her before they have to announce that she too is leaving.

If the administration is not to blame for last year's entire CC department leaving - who is? Someone had to have hired them all thinking they were competent, and now all 3 have left. Why would 3 employees leave Sidwell all at once if they were being treated well and respected by the administration? And it wasn't because of the parents. Granted, last year's graduating class had its share of difficult parents. But these are professionals who know how to deal with parents. They only left because they did not feel supported by the administration.

Many of the points made in this earlier post—which was written before the news of Emily’s departure was widely announced—are very troubling. About the administration generally, and also the counseling office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bringing up the GDS CCO isn't really helpful or relevant here. GDS students emerge from a pedagogical environment where they're used to self-advocating and becoming thought leaders, and they don't really need much assistance or direction from a CCO to make their applications stand out as unique from other applicants.

But at Sidwell, the CCO function is really important in helping the students craft unique narratives that differentiate themselves from other high-achievers that otherwise look a little more generic on paper. The administration needs to invest in making the department up to this critical task because these are typically great students who just need a little more guidance and help in finding their way and telling their stories.

translation:

GDS students emerge from GDS completely full of themselves and using ridiculous phrases like "thought leaders". They need no adult assistance to produce college applications that make themselves sound like the second coming of the Lord.

LOL +1

Also true at SFS. The students have been told this their entire lives.

Maybe so, but according to the PP, only GDS students believe it.

[Anonymous]

This year SFS didn’t publish the names of the students who are National Merit Scholar Semifinalists. You’d think a school that touts its academics would celebrate their recognized students, but even that appears to be a state secret. I don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bringing up the GDS CCO isn't really helpful or relevant here. GDS students emerge from a pedagogical environment where they're used to self-advocating and becoming thought leaders, and they don't really need much assistance or direction from a CCO to make their applications stand out as unique from other applicants.

But at Sidwell, the CCO function is really important in helping the students craft unique narratives that differentiate themselves from other high-achievers that otherwise look a little more generic on paper. The administration needs to invest in making the department up to this critical task because these are typically great students who just need a little more guidance and help in finding their way and telling their stories.

translation:

GDS students emerge from GDS completely full of themselves and using ridiculous phrases like "thought leaders". They need no adult assistance to produce college applications that make themselves sound like the second coming of the Lord.

LOL +1

+ everything

Ahhh, GDS and its constant providing of amusement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then suggest it to the administration rather than complaining about it on an anonymous message board.

The administration is weak and terrible, as you surely know if you have 2 kids in US. The teachers are great but happy with the way things are.

+1. The upper school administration is incompetent. Teachers are great.

I agree that the faculty are great and about the administration. The dysfunction was in the college counseling office last year and the year before. One counselor was just plain incompetent. It took too long, but the admin finally showed him the door. The CCO director was too stubborn, refused to admit he had a staff problem, and grew increasingly frustrated and checked out. Now he’s gone, gone, Gonzaga. To the extent that the administration is to blame, they took too long to force changes, and they still need to provide additional resources to the CCO. But they did act in the end, and recruited back an excellent director to lead and rebuild the CCO.

It's quite the opposite. The administration is completely incompetent and the teachers (who I agree are top-notch) are all trying to figure out how to abandon the sinking ship. The administration (truly led by the current Assistant Head of School who is delusional - she believes that Sidwell is perfect in every way and will hear nothing to the contrary) is more concerned with Sidwell's image than they are with the well-being of the students or the faculty. Ask anyone who works there.

The majority of families thought that last year's CCO director, who is currently very successful and happy at Gonzaga, was a rockstar. The actual reason why he left was because he thought the US Principal was incompetent, and he no longer felt comfortable working for him. He voiced his concerns, but the administration did not listen. And the fact that he tried to stick up for one of his employees and to help him perform better in his job instead of just getting rid of him, I find to be commendable. The "excellent" director that they recruited back was originally asked to leave because she was spending too much time on her outside consulting practice and not enough time on working with the Sidwell students. They were grasping at straws and offered her a boatload of money to come back for a year. Funny how they asked her to leave and then 3 years later begged her to come back.

The administration treats the CCO with such little respect, the only CC left from last year has now resigned - and broken her contract. The woosies at the school are not going to announce this until the middle of December - after EA and ED decisions come out. I am sure they are scrambling to replace her before they have to announce that she too is leaving.

If the administration is not to blame for last year's entire CC department leaving - who is? Someone had to have hired them all thinking they were competent, and now all 3 have left. Why would 3 employees leave Sidwell all at once if they were being treated well and respected by the administration? And it wasn't because of the parents. Granted, last year's graduating class had its share of difficult parents. But these are professionals who know how to deal with parents. They only left because they did not feel supported by the administration.

Many of the points made in this earlier post—which was written before the news of Emily’s departure was widely announced—are very troubling. About the administration generally, and also the counseling office.

Hopefully the board is listening and observing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This year SFS didn’t publish the names of the students who are National Merit Scholar Semifinalists. You’d think a school that touts its academics would celebrate their recognized students, but even that appears to be a state secret. I don’t get it.

They haven't for many years. It is a Quaker school where individual accolades are not singled out. They did away with "senior awards" a decade or so ago for the same reason. The kids who ear awards know who they are and that is all that matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then suggest it to the administration rather than complaining about it on an anonymous message board.

The administration is weak and terrible, as you surely know if you have 2 kids in US. The teachers are great but happy with the way things are.

+1. The upper school administration is incompetent. Teachers are great.

I agree that the faculty are great and about the administration. The dysfunction was in the college counseling office last year and the year before. One counselor was just plain incompetent. It took too long, but the admin finally showed him the door. The CCO director was too stubborn, refused to admit he had a staff problem, and grew increasingly frustrated and checked out. Now he’s gone, gone, Gonzaga. To the extent that the administration is to blame, they took too long to force changes, and they still need to provide additional resources to the CCO. But they did act in the end, and recruited back an excellent director to lead and rebuild the CCO.

It's quite the opposite. The administration is completely incompetent and the teachers (who I agree are top-notch) are all trying to figure out how to abandon the sinking ship. The administration (truly led by the current Assistant Head of School who is delusional - she believes that Sidwell is perfect in every way and will hear nothing to the contrary) is more concerned with Sidwell's image than they are with the well-being of the students or the faculty. Ask anyone who works there.

The majority of families thought that last year's CCO director, who is currently very successful and happy at Gonzaga, was a rockstar. The actual reason why he left was because he thought the US Principal was incompetent, and he no longer felt comfortable working for him. He voiced his concerns, but the administration did not listen. And the fact that he tried to stick up for one of his employees and to help him perform better in his job instead of just getting rid of him, I find to be commendable. The "excellent" director that they recruited back was originally asked to leave because she was spending too much time on her outside consulting practice and not enough time on working with the Sidwell students. They were grasping at straws and offered her a boatload of money to come back for a year. Funny how they asked her to leave and then 3 years later begged her to come back.

The administration treats the CCO with such little respect, the only CC left from last year has now resigned - and broken her contract. The woosies at the school are not going to announce this until the middle of December - after EA and ED decisions come out. I am sure they are scrambling to replace her before they have to announce that she too is leaving.

If the administration is not to blame for last year's entire CC department leaving - who is? Someone had to have hired them all thinking they were competent, and now all 3 have left. Why would 3 employees leave Sidwell all at once if they were being treated well and respected by the administration? And it wasn't because of the parents. Granted, last year's graduating class had its share of difficult parents. But these are professionals who know how to deal with parents. They only left because they did not feel supported by the administration.

Many of the points made in this earlier post—which was written before the news of Emily’s departure was widely announced—are very troubling. About the administration generally, and also the counseling office.

Hopefully the board is listening and observing.

I would agree. But "listening and observing" what exactly? How are we supposed to register our concern? Should those of us alarmed by the chaos be emailing the head of school individually one by one? there's no forum for discussing this. I'm not aware that the administration is seeking feedback from parents on this.

[Anonymous]

And the fact that he tried to stick up for one of his employees and to help him perform better in his job instead of just getting rid of him, I find to be commendable.

The employee was by a wide margin the most incompetent staff member that we encountered in 12 years as part of the Sidwell community. People can make hiring mistakes, but the former director owns the fact that he did not fix the situation until the admin forced him to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This year SFS didn’t publish the names of the students who are National Merit Scholar Semifinalists. You’d think a school that touts its academics would celebrate their recognized students, but even that appears to be a state secret. I don’t get it.

They haven't for many years. It is a Quaker school where individual accolades are not singled out. They did away with "senior awards" a decade or so ago for the same reason. The kids who ear awards know who they are and that is all that matters.

This is true - no homecoming king/queen etc either. It's a Quaker thing.