Now that it's over, tell me about the good and bad experiences you had with admissions offices

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Burke was the worst. SSFS was the best.

+ 1 SSFS was amazing and accommodating!

What was up with Burke? The contact I interacted with was kind of rude I thought. Then I felt maybe I was taking things the wrong way.

Was Burke hard getting into this year?

Funny, didn’t apply to Burke, felt that way about SSFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a confirmed Episcopalian and active in his church youth group made no difference to SAES, which offered DS a place on its WL for 9th grade. (Bullis accepted DS). SAES should just rename itself as The Andrews School and be done with it.

We also had a very lackluster experience with SAES admissions. Not responsive, seemed uninterested, emailed with a question that went unanswered, etc. Left little to be desired.

Our experience was quite the opposite. They answered every email and call promptly and couldn't have been more pleasant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really liked the Bullis admissions team. Very personable.

Matt Trammell is an ultimate professional. Our DC chose another school, and it was very difficult to tell Matt, because he had been so welcoming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good experience with Flint Hill. Dealt with multiple AOs and all were very helpful, informative, accessible, and friendly.

I couldn't disagree more. We were so turned off by the admissions person that we turned down the school when our DC was accepted. If that was who the school thought represented them, then we knew the school wasn't where we wanted our daughter to attend.

[Anonymous]

Sidwell: AD was wonderful, she had read our application in advance and referenced it. Seemed to really want to know us and DC. I thought the academic assessment was over the top. Purely academic, silent testing, but with other kids on the video as well, also silently testing. Seemed like a missed opportunity to get to know the kids. Transcripts, school assessment reports, and teacher reccs could be referenced for the academics.

GDS: virtual play date was great and DC enjoyed it. Engaging and fun. The parent interview was, blah in comparison, but not horrible. In-person visit for admitted families was informative and warm. They truly made us feel welcomed and like we were already part of the community. I’m sorry that some would choose not to apply just because they didn’t like the interview. If we had made that decision we would have missed out on what seems like a great school.

Sheridan: seems like a warm, approachable place, but was turned off by the curriculum used (similar to public) and a realization during the process that for sure we wanted a k-12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good experience with Flint Hill. Dealt with multiple AOs and all were very helpful, informative, accessible, and friendly.

I couldn't disagree more. We were so turned off by the admissions person that we turned down the school when our DC was accepted. If that was who the school thought represented them, then we knew the school wasn't where we wanted our daughter to attend.

the guy doing 5th grade admissions was good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied Potomac (only) and got WL x2. Found them to be helpful and communicative throughout the process. Only thing that surprised us quite a bit was the 1:1 session with our K was extremely basic, with exercises on the order of drawing a shape using the right color crayon. I know it wasn't supposed to be an entirely academic evaluation, but still it was just surprised they weren't asking at least SOME questions to get a better handle on where DC was at in terms of math, reading, writing, etc.

Agree it was pretty basic. Maybe it was a screener? Like make sure the kid passes the bare minimum and then they’ll take who they want based on wealth, status, etc. (can you tell I’m bitter lol)

This wasn't our experience, and we got in for K (not a big donor, or URM, or super wealthy). They started with the crayons, colors, shapes, etc. but worked up to addition, subtraction, double digit number recognition, etc. with our DD over the course of the half hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a confirmed Episcopalian and active in his church youth group made no difference to SAES, which offered DS a place on its WL for 9th grade. (Bullis accepted DS). SAES should just rename itself as The Andrews School and be done with it.

We also had a very lackluster experience with SAES admissions. Not responsive, seemed uninterested, emailed with a question that went unanswered, etc. Left little to be desired.

Our experience was quite the opposite. They answered every email and call promptly and couldn't have been more pleasant.

I really liked admissions at SAES. They waitlisted us and wasn’t our top choice anyway, but I thought admissions was great

[Anonymous]

We never even applied to GDS because when we showed up for the tour (that we booked, online, well in advance) it was as if the admissions office had forgotten there was a tour at all--they were super late, we were waiting around the lobby area. Then finally they grabbed a parent volunteer to lead the tour who seemed to know very little about the school (she couldn't answer basic questions). Very off-putting and disorganized.

[Anonymous]

We had a fantastic, responsive, and incredibly engaged experience at WES. The admissions guy was responsive and easy to talk to, and we met the head of school, division heads, and various faculty and staff, some that even followed up to questions we had through email and phone calls. organized, enthusiastic, and welcoming.

[Anonymous]

GDS: they had not read out application when we went for parent interview. They did not ask any valuable questions that would inform tgem of our family or DC. They seemed disorganized.

Maret: very specific questions were asked. AD had read our application ahead of time.

Sidwell: AD had read our application and very specific about our family, DC and other questions were asked. Impressive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied Potomac (only) and got WL x2. Found them to be helpful and communicative throughout the process. Only thing that surprised us quite a bit was the 1:1 session with our K was extremely basic, with exercises on the order of drawing a shape using the right color crayon. I know it wasn't supposed to be an entirely academic evaluation, but still it was just surprised they weren't asking at least SOME questions to get a better handle on where DC was at in terms of math, reading, writing, etc.

That's not really what a school like Potomac is looking for in a K applicant. If you are interested in that kind of assessment, you should seek out schools with more traditional approaches to pedagogy.

Not sure what you mean by “that’s not what they’re looking for” but my assumption wasn’t that they’d be hyperfocused on academics, but at least show some passing interest in whether the kid can read or do basic addition, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all the people who felt unloved by the private school admission process, better build a thicker skin for college!

NP college admissions has 0 parent involvement

HAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
We also had a really terrible experience with GDS admissions. We applied for two kids. We had two interviews with two different admissions officers and both were really disinterested in getting to know us. It was a huge turn off for our daughter who had previously been enamored with GDS. But in the end, I'm really grateful that the interviews were so awful because they forced us to broaden our search and we ended up finding schools that are really great fits for our kids.

They were uninterested, not disinterested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied Potomac (only) and got WL x2. Found them to be helpful and communicative throughout the process. Only thing that surprised us quite a bit was the 1:1 session with our K was extremely basic, with exercises on the order of drawing a shape using the right color crayon. I know it wasn't supposed to be an entirely academic evaluation, but still it was just surprised they weren't asking at least SOME questions to get a better handle on where DC was at in terms of math, reading, writing, etc.

That's not really what a school like Potomac is looking for in a K applicant. If you are interested in that kind of assessment, you should seek out schools with more traditional approaches to pedagogy.

Not sure what you mean by “that’s not what they’re looking for” but my assumption wasn’t that they’d be hyperfocused on academics, but at least show some passing interest in whether the kid can read or do basic addition, etc.

For K?