Norwood Middle School: What do you love? Not love?

[Anonymous]

Re 19:28. St Andrew's has some great kids who graduated from Norwood. It absolutely will push them to reach their individual potential, it just won't try to break them in the process.

[Anonymous]

No not prep high school only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, here is my comparison.

Holton, more rigor, more nail biting, more mean girl. Great academics (maybe best in DC area), the school can work with all kids.
Landon, odd blast from the past, pugnacious boys, slightly better academics than Norwood.
Georgetown Prep. Good academics, strong contender, slightly better academics than Norwood, better sports.
Stone Ridge, slightly better academics, up and coming school. Girls seem happy.
Bullis, better sports, up and coming.
St. Andrews, will not push your child to full potential (see Holton).
WES, not so happy kids. Academics on par with Norwood.

Unfortunately, this is not a credible comparison because there is no way you can know all these schools intimately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with 20:44, if your child is being asked to be tutored, they are obviously not performing to the level of the other students in the grade. It's not the right school for your child, you should find one that is the right fit for them.

It is not my child, but the request has been made of many families. Some of these kids have those famously very high WPPSI scores that we are all so fond of in this area. It is well known that the better teachers get the kids who are thought to be more average, and the poor teachers get the kids who are so smart, they don't need to be taught. Every now and then, there is a bright kid who needs instruction, and it turns out to be a bad mix. Also, there are no SN kids at Norwood, the kids are well behaved, bright, eager, and the classes are small. Seems like it should be easy as pie.
I have heard similar complaints at Sidwell, teachers getting used to the idea of the genius that just self teaches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with 20:44, if your child is being asked to be tutored, they are obviously not performing to the level of the other students in the grade. It's not the right school for your child, you should find one that is the right fit for them.

It is not my child, but the request has been made of many families. Some of these kids have those famously very high WPPSI scores that we are all so fond of in this area. It is well known that the better teachers get the kids who are thought to be more average, and the poor teachers get the kids who are so smart, they don't need to be taught. Every now and then, there is a bright kid who needs instruction, and it turns out to be a bad mix. Also, there are no SN kids at Norwood, the kids are well behaved, bright, eager, and the classes are small. Seems like it should be easy as pie.
I have heard similar complaints at Sidwell, teachers getting used to the idea of the genius that just self teaches.

This is an interesting perspective . I have a child at Norwood who is tutored in reading ( outside tutor, at home) Lower school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is well known that the better teachers get the kids who are thought to be more average, and the poor teachers get the kids who are so smart, they don't need to be taught.

This is nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with 20:44, if your child is being asked to be tutored, they are obviously not performing to the level of the other students in the grade. It's not the right school for your child, you should find one that is the right fit for them.

It is not my child, but the request has been made of many families. Some of these kids have those famously very high WPPSI scores that we are all so fond of in this area. It is well known that the better teachers get the kids who are thought to be more average, and the poor teachers get the kids who are so smart, they don't need to be taught. Every now and then, there is a bright kid who needs instruction, and it turns out to be a bad mix. Also, there are no SN kids at Norwood, the kids are well behaved, bright, eager, and the classes are small. Seems like it should be easy as pie.
I have heard similar complaints at Sidwell, teachers getting used to the idea of the genius that just self teaches.

Blaming the teachers again? Yawn.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, teachers are responsible for learning on the classroom. The pp point is that these are prepared, well behaved children with involved parents and so the excuse that teachers often use that ir is the kids does not wash here.

I am not sure i have seen better teachers get less bright kids but sometimes there is a cluster of similarly academic kids in order to facilitate instruction. That seems to make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately there are several area of weakness in the Middle school. I will not comment on teachers because that seems like it could become very personal very quickly.

Math. One outstanding teacher. The rest average or less so.
Science: ???
English: fairly strong but somewhat dependent on learning style


One of the problems is the lack of study skills and organization skills. Presently not taught in any systematic way.

If you have a kid that can figure out the organizational piece on their own you might be pretty happy.

Which is why some parents are very happy and some are less so.

I have a few questions about your post. First, can you elaborate on science? I have heard that the middle school science curriculum (grades 5-8), especially the 7th and 8th grade science program, is excellent. If you have experience with Norwood´s middle school, can you please comment on the science program, in particular 7th and 8th grade. Also, I heard that one of the middle school math teachers is leaving because the family is moving. Is this the outstanding math teacher?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, teachers are responsible for learning on the classroom. The pp point is that these are prepared, well behaved children with involved parents and so the excuse that teachers often use that ir is the kids does not wash here.

I am not sure i have seen better teachers get less bright kids but sometimes there is a cluster of similarly academic kids in order to facilitate instruction. That seems to make sense.

Let me be very clear: I don't believe what you are saying about subpar teaching. In my experience, the people who generally complain are those who are essentially delusional about their child's native gifts and abilities, and when their child does not meet their outsized expectations they are the first to blame the teachers.

[Anonymous]

Actually, I never said the teachers were sub par. Someone else may have. I posted 11:13. You seem to think there is only one poster. That is incorrect. I am responding to the yawn poster. This was a thread intentionally asking for comments on teacher quality. If that does not interest you do not read it.

I believe your experience to be true. You believe that the people who complain about teacher quality are delusional. That is not my experience. The people I know who complain about teacher quality variability (sometimes teachers themselves) are not delusional about their children.

They are often familiar with many teachers and have witnessed the difference an exceptional teacher can make.

[Anonymous]

Norwood science is fabulous. The 7/8 program is entirely lab based. The years below are packed with experiential learning opportunities. My children left Norwood feeling like real scientists and with strong science thinking skills and the ability to use a science notebook and no fear of a science lab. My daugher is now in advanced bio and she is not "a science person." Everyone is a "science person" at Norwood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I never said the teachers were sub par. Someone else may have. I posted 11:13. You seem to think there is only one poster. That is incorrect. I am responding to the yawn poster. This was a thread intentionally asking for comments on teacher quality. If that does not interest you do not read it.

I believe your experience to be true. You believe that the people who complain about teacher quality are delusional. That is not my experience. The people I know who complain about teacher quality variability (sometimes teachers themselves) are not delusional about their children.

They are often familiar with many teachers and have witnessed the difference an exceptional teacher can make.

We can all agree that not every professional in any field, including teaching, is "exceptional." We can all agree that exceptional teachers make a huge difference. We can also all agree that no private school or public school or university in this country has all "exceptional" teachers (Harvard/Yale/Princeton) may have great scholars but some are clunkers as "teachers."

This thread, however, and other recent Norwood threads, appear to be pushing a narrative that Norwood teachers are below average, at a minimum. I don't know if this is one poster, a few disgruntled families, or an attempt by an applicant's parent to manipulate the yield by trying to run down Norwood (like those on internet chat rooms trying to drive down a company's stock price so it can be acquired cheaply). (I'd hate to think the parent body is widely populated by carping, entitled second-guessers.) But there's a very unpleasant tone to all of this. The teachers work hard, they are good people, and they deserve more respect than being trashed, even if on a collective basis, by people hiding behind the anonymity of an internet forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I never said the teachers were sub par. Someone else may have. I posted 11:13. You seem to think there is only one poster. That is incorrect. I am responding to the yawn poster. This was a thread intentionally asking for comments on teacher quality. If that does not interest you do not read it.

I believe your experience to be true. You believe that the people who complain about teacher quality are delusional. That is not my experience. The people I know who complain about teacher quality variability (sometimes teachers themselves) are not delusional about their children.

They are often familiar with many teachers and have witnessed the difference an exceptional teacher can make.

We can all agree that not every professional in any field, including teaching, is "exceptional." We can all agree that exceptional teachers make a huge difference. We can also all agree that no private school or public school or university in this country has all "exceptional" teachers (Harvard/Yale/Princeton) may have great scholars but some are clunkers as "teachers."

This thread, however, and other recent Norwood threads, appear to be pushing a narrative that Norwood teachers are below average, at a minimum. I don't know if this is one poster, a few disgruntled families, or an attempt by an applicant's parent to manipulate the yield by trying to run down Norwood (like those on internet chat rooms trying to drive down a company's stock price so it can be acquired cheaply). (I'd hate to think the parent body is widely populated by carping, entitled second-guessers.) But there's a very unpleasant tone to all of this. The teachers work hard, they are good people, and they deserve more respect than being trashed, even if on a collective basis, by people hiding behind the anonymity of an internet forum.

Some of what is probably driving this is the recent tuition hikes and the contracts that are due.
Believe it or not, there are many families who question what they are getting for the dollar at ALL private schools. The consumers are looking under the hood to see what needs work, and asking if any competitor offers the same deal. For a K-8 in MD, the competition is GA and CES. Trust me, these schools have their issues and people have walked from them too.
These threads actually have taken a new turn in recent months and I wonder with all the comparing that takes place on DCUM, whether schools will have to reshape to fit consumer demands. Norwood promises to be a happy place of learning, and it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Norwood science is fabulous. The 7/8 program is entirely lab based. The years below are packed with experiential learning opportunities. My children left Norwood feeling like real scientists and with strong science thinking skills and the ability to use a science notebook and no fear of a science lab. My daugher is now in advanced bio and she is not "a science person." Everyone is a "science person" at Norwood.

Thanks for the feedback about science. Were you happy that you stayed at Norwood through the 8th grade, or do you wish you had left earlier, i.e., do you wish your child had moved to another school in either 6th or 7th grade so that she could have gotten the kinks worked out before starting high school? Or do you think it didn't matter? Was it harder for her to make friends entering in 9th grade?