Elite private school for typical smart kid

[Anonymous]

I think a parent has to be pretty weird or socially inept to be totally rejected. Your family may do just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are you people falling for an obvious and badly done troll?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you people falling for an obvious and badly done troll?

I am not a troll. I have friends who seem to be outcasts or at least not included at St Albans. Their kids are unhooked so I wonder why all the effort of being not accepted at a school. College admissions don’t seem like it would even benefit their kid since all the hooked kids will take the coveted ivy spots. I think their kid could be equally happy at the local good public.

I’m probably just projecting my own rationale on keeping my kids in public.

STA can be a hard social scene. We joined in 9th and I'm very grateful that we had years in public to develop a community in that (more down-to-earth) environment. The parents at STA are nice enough but many are in pretty high-flying crowds and can be quite insular. Many of us who are
more peripheral to Washington society find each other at STA (and I've made good friends) but I can't imagine relying on STA for my primary parent friend group.
That said, my son has had no issues with making friends. The boys are very accepting and my son has fit in without any issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

Right and if you think there aren’t parents in this area who could afford something better, but choose to keep their kids in an inferior option because they’d rather spend the money on fancy vacations and luxury cars, then you’re naive.

DH and I are from humble beginnings. We have chosen to send our kids to public because we want them to attend school with kids like us. We do live well and have a lovely home, travel and have nice cars. We can afford tuition without financial strain.

So you’re prioritizing the social aspect over quality of education.

It is very narrow-minded to think that education only happens in a school building. There is great educational value in travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you people falling for an obvious and badly done troll?

I am not a troll. I have friends who seem to be outcasts or at least not included at St Albans. Their kids are unhooked so I wonder why all the effort of being not accepted at a school. College admissions don’t seem like it would even benefit their kid since all the hooked kids will take the coveted ivy spots. I think their kid could be equally happy at the local good public.

I’m probably just projecting my own rationale on keeping my kids in public.

STA can be a hard social scene. We joined in 9th and I'm very grateful that we had years in public to develop a community in that (more down-to-earth) environment. The parents at STA are nice enough but many are in pretty high-flying crowds and can be quite insular. Many of us who are
more peripheral to Washington society find each other at STA (and I've made good friends) but I can't imagine relying on STA for my primary parent friend group.
That said, my son has had no issues with making friends. The boys are very accepting and my son has fit in without any issues.

This is my experience as well. The boys at STA are great and your son will find his tribe, but I would rather eat glass than be around a lot of the parents.

[Anonymous]

Elite? Come on.

[Anonymous]

Who cares if that mom has been rejected socially? What does that even mean? And again, who cares? That seems a weird metric to use to decide whether to send your own kid to a private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

Right and if you think there aren’t parents in this area who could afford something better, but choose to keep their kids in an inferior option because they’d rather spend the money on fancy vacations and luxury cars, then you’re naive.

DH and I are from humble beginnings. We have chosen to send our kids to public because we want them to attend school with kids like us. We do live well and have a lovely home, travel and have nice cars. We can afford tuition without financial strain.

So you’re prioritizing the social aspect over quality of education.

It is very narrow-minded to think that education only happens in a school building. There is great educational value in travel.

No number of vacations can make up for subpar schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does unhooked mean???

I keep seeing that word on this board and have no clue what it mean.

Is it something only rich white people know?

Yes

Hooks are things like:
URM under represented minority
Excels in a niche area (sports, art, etc)
Legacy
Recognizable rich parents (e.g., Trumps, Clinton's, Vanderbilt)
Surname on buildings
Offers a 7+ figure donation to the schools capital campaign.

So yes, your typical upper middleclass white family is acutely aware these hooks are necessary for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

And you're the "fool" who completely missed the boat that education is MORE than college admissions for these families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

And you're the "fool" who completely missed the boat that education is MORE than college admissions for these families.

Yep. There’s something sad about the knee-jerk reduction of secondary education to “college admissions”. Elementary and secondary school are 13 years of a child’s life. College is 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

And you're the "fool" who completely missed the boat that education is MORE than college admissions for these families.

Yep. There’s something sad about the knee-jerk reduction of secondary education to “college admissions”. Elementary and secondary school are 13 years of a child’s life. College is 4.

Yeah, it says a lot about their view of education that they think private schools could only possibly be worth it if they give a kid a leg up on college admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

And you're the "fool" who completely missed the boat that education is MORE than college admissions for these families.

Yep. There’s something sad about the knee-jerk reduction of secondary education to “college admissions”. Elementary and secondary school are 13 years of a child’s life. College is 4.

Yeah, it says a lot about their view of education that they think private schools could only possibly be worth it if they give a kid a leg up on college admissions.

Didn’t OP say they know the parents want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

And you're the "fool" who completely missed the boat that education is MORE than college admissions for these families.

Yep. There’s something sad about the knee-jerk reduction of secondary education to “college admissions”. Elementary and secondary school are 13 years of a child’s life. College is 4.

Yeah, it says a lot about their view of education that they think private schools could only possibly be worth it if they give a kid a leg up on college admissions.

Didn’t OP say they know the parents want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent?

I seriously doubt OP has ever talked to the parents, and so doesn’t know what they want. I’m sure they do want their kids to go to strong schools, but that’s not the main reason why a lot of people send their kids to private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

They certainly taught delusion. Full pay at Andover/Exeter and you don't think you're wealth. You don't think there was value in admissions, but you were confident enough to only apply to two schools.

Confident enough to only apply to two schools? I read this as “applied early decision to one school, non binding early action to another, was accepted to both.” This is what I did from my private HS fifteen or so years ago…