Sienna School vs Field

[Anonymous]

I'd never send a kid who needs any kind of learning support to Field. Chaotic environment with lots of recent college grads giving it a whirl as a teacher for a year or two. Kind of like Teach for America, but the kids' parents are paying 60k+ for the experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, people consider behavior problems things like interrupting the class so the other kids can’t learn. Field does not have that. It is like Maret: a non-pressure cooker, very normal school, a bit easier to get into than Maret.

LMAO

Maret? They both have the word "school" in their names, and they both charge about the same tuition rate. Similarities end there.

[Anonymous]

Like someone said, apples to oranges. Maybe Siena vs. McLean? or Field vs. Burke?? Siena is more intensive than McLean, but McLean has more of the extracurriculars that Field does...while still intentionally supporting kids that need it. But Field is not selling that as part of their program. But Siena certainly is. I wouldn't have those two on my lists is basically what I'm saying...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were told my child would have wonderful accommodations at Field (during the admissions and acceptance process). It was awful. It took months for them to provide an accommodations document and my DS had to almost argue with every teacher when he needed to use them (extra time on tests, chunking assignments). Field says they'll do it then don't (we aren't the only ones who had this experience). This was three years ago. We only stayed a year.

I’m so sorry to read this. My family had the same experience years ago. Shame on Field for selling a bag of goods they have no interest or ability to deliver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd never send a kid who needs any kind of learning support to Field. Chaotic environment with lots of recent college grads giving it a whirl as a teacher for a year or two. Kind of like Teach for America, but the kids' parents are paying 60k+ for the experience.

This is exactly right. We considered Field but it was a mixed bag of legacies who had been there forever and brand new hires that did not have education credentials. Seemed like a sale pitch that was way overpriced. Also, the building was beautiful but smelled like mold everywhere. Too many academic and health concerns, no thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were told my child would have wonderful accommodations at Field (during the admissions and acceptance process). It was awful. It took months for them to provide an accommodations document and my DS had to almost argue with every teacher when he needed to use them (extra time on tests, chunking assignments). Field says they'll do it then don't (we aren't the only ones who had this experience). This was three years ago. We only stayed a year.

I’m so sorry to read this. My family had the same experience years ago. Shame on Field for selling a bag of goods they have no interest or ability to deliver.

The current HOS lori strauss has no intention of keeping Field that way it was, whether the board has asked her to do this it is her own plan - who knows. What I know as a DC teacher at a nearby school is Field is not Field anymore and that is sad. So many teachers there have left because of poor treatment from admin. The overpaid, bloated administration there have consumed tuition for themselves and left little for the education of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were told my child would have wonderful accommodations at Field (during the admissions and acceptance process). It was awful. It took months for them to provide an accommodations document and my DS had to almost argue with every teacher when he needed to use them (extra time on tests, chunking assignments). Field says they'll do it then don't (we aren't the only ones who had this experience). This was three years ago. We only stayed a year.

I’m so sorry to read this. My family had the same experience years ago. Shame on Field for selling a bag of goods they have no interest or ability to deliver.

Me three. It was so disappointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret has a 10% admissions rate for 6th. Where does the next 10% go? Not Sidwell, GDS, or NCS. They go to Field.

It is not a school where Sienna students would thrive. That misconception leads to many students being weeded out during admissions.

Kids leaving Siena with remediated dyslexia can thrive in lots of places, including Field (and Maret). When my child was at Field (several years ago), there were a number of kids who had come from Lab after they no longer needed the intensive support.

Kids with remediated dyslexia can thrive anywhere. However Field does not offer the remediation.

Field is no longer the place it was when Lab School kids successfully went there in high numbers. It is sad to see Field try to be something it is not, it is not GDS, it is not Gonzaga or Sidwell and it is failing to make the grade. Lab School needs a better partner so we are keeping our eyes on Sienna, I hope they stay true to their mission better than Field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Siena and Field are like apples and oranges. Siena's mission is to "prepare bright, college-bound students with language-based learning differences, such as dyslexia, to become confident, curious learners who understand their personal strengths and gain the tools and strategies to excel." In other words, it begins with learning differences and builds out its pedagogy and curriculum from there. From what I understand from parents whose kids have gone or go there, it is very successful in realizing its mission.

Field's mission begins with an "inquiry-based curriculum" that "stresse[s] dialogue, analytic thinking, and larger lessons of how young people could grow to become generous, responsible, and self-knowing adults." While Field attracts, to be sure, many students with learning differences, it is not a special education school. In fact, none of its teachers are professionally trained in special education. It's intellectual environment uses "universal pedagogy," which means that the teachers break down projects into progressively more complex chunks resulting in an advanced final product. While this scaffolding is known for working with kids with learning differences, Field believes, based on research, that universal pedagogy improves learning for every kind of student. Perhaps, that is why Field attracts a wide range of students.

I don't think Field overpromises, as others have written. I really don't. My experience is that it tells prospective families openly, clearly, and repeatedly what it can offer and what it cannot. It does have a fantastic learning support person, and its extraordinary teachers certainly help students find successful strategies to excel in their academics. The homework load is lighter than the "Top 5," but it is not because of the student body, but because Field believes, based on volumes of research, that excessive homework, often without clear and meaningful purpose, is counterproductive for deep learning. I have heard from several parents whose children go to Field and Maret, GDS, Sidwell, is that the sophistication of the learning is quite similar.

GOLLY, SOUNDS LIKE THE HEAD OF FIELD'S MARKETING DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO SOUND CASUAL, GOOD PR THOUGH, HOPE YOU CAN SLEEP AT NIGHT WITH YOUR LIES.

[Anonymous]

As a current Field family, I’m perplexed by the people who think Field had to forever remain as whatever it was that they liked about it. It had some other mission? As a partner of Lab? Why? It’s been great for my kids. As is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd never send a kid who needs any kind of learning support to Field. Chaotic environment with lots of recent college grads giving it a whirl as a teacher for a year or two. Kind of like Teach for America, but the kids' parents are paying 60k+ for the experience.

This is exactly right. We considered Field but it was a mixed bag of legacies who had been there forever and brand new hires that did not have education credentials. Seemed like a sale pitch that was way overpriced. Also, the building was beautiful but smelled like mold everywhere. Too many academic and health concerns, no thank you.

Does it have mold??? We went to a school event there last year, to support a friend's child, and everyone in my family was wheezing for about a day. No thanks!

[Anonymous]

Field: Claustrophobic -level narrow hallways and classrooms despite "new labs" bs; very unsophisticated teachers who seem not to read the news or know anything outside their silos, poorly trained aggressive marketers all over this board and now all over the local listservs, completely naive Board that has no idea how bad the head is. Mold (at the very least symbolically--all over)-- Its not nice on the inside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret has a 10% admissions rate for 6th. Where does the next 10% go? Not Sidwell, GDS, or NCS. They go to Field.

It is not a school where Sienna students would thrive. That misconception leads to many students being weeded out during admissions.

Kids leaving Siena with remediated dyslexia can thrive in lots of places, including Field (and Maret). When my child was at Field (several years ago), there were a number of kids who had come from Lab after they no longer needed the intensive support.

Kids with remediated dyslexia can thrive anywhere. However Field does not offer the remediation.

Field is no longer the place it was when Lab School kids successfully went there in high numbers. It is sad to see Field try to be something it is not, it is not GDS, it is not Gonzaga or Sidwell and it is failing to make the grade. Lab School needs a better partner so we are keeping our eyes on Sienna, I hope they stay true to their mission better than Field.

I think of Siena as equivalent to Lab, not a next step. Whereas pre-pandemic, Field was proud of accepting kids with disabilities -- not as a SN school, but a place that was accommodating and inclusive to those who no longer needed specialized instruction. While the new attitude toward disabilities might serve some students fine, it's a loss to the private school universe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret has a 10% admissions rate for 6th. Where does the next 10% go? Not Sidwell, GDS, or NCS. They go to Field.

It is not a school where Sienna students would thrive. That misconception leads to many students being weeded out during admissions.

Kids leaving Siena with remediated dyslexia can thrive in lots of places, including Field (and Maret). When my child was at Field (several years ago), there were a number of kids who had come from Lab after they no longer needed the intensive support.

Kids with remediated dyslexia can thrive anywhere. However Field does not offer the remediation.

Field is no longer the place it was when Lab School kids successfully went there in high numbers. It is sad to see Field try to be something it is not, it is not GDS, it is not Gonzaga or Sidwell and it is failing to make the grade. Lab School needs a better partner so we are keeping our eyes on Sienna, I hope they stay true to their mission better than Field.

I think of Siena as equivalent to Lab, not a next step. Whereas pre-pandemic, Field was proud of accepting kids with disabilities -- not as a SN school, but a place that was accommodating and inclusive to those who no longer needed specialized instruction. While the new attitude toward disabilities might serve some students fine, it's a loss to the private school universe.

Field has long been a magnet for parents of special needs kids because it lets parents feel like they have mainstreamed their child in an expensive private school that has some of the bells and whistles of other independent schools---but little to no homework or academic challenge. Field has been desperate for money over the many years since it built out its current campus and has been happy to admit anyone who can pay. But the problem for the kids is that Field has minimal capacity to meet the needs of special needs kids. So those kids languish, get distracted and disruptive, and drag down the entire class. That's the modern Field story. Old timers there will talk about the vision of the founder and of everyone sitting around some broken down mansions in Kalorama counting on an abacus and singing Kumbaya. But those days are long gone and the new Field business plan is to grab as much money as it can by admitting rich kids with significant needs who have parents with too much pride to enroll them in a school actually set up to help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maret has a 10% admissions rate for 6th. Where does the next 10% go? Not Sidwell, GDS, or NCS. They go to Field.

It is not a school where Sienna students would thrive. That misconception leads to many students being weeded out during admissions.

Kids leaving Siena with remediated dyslexia can thrive in lots of places, including Field (and Maret). When my child was at Field (several years ago), there were a number of kids who had come from Lab after they no longer needed the intensive support.

Kids with remediated dyslexia can thrive anywhere. However Field does not offer the remediation.

Field is no longer the place it was when Lab School kids successfully went there in high numbers. It is sad to see Field try to be something it is not, it is not GDS, it is not Gonzaga or Sidwell and it is failing to make the grade. Lab School needs a better partner so we are keeping our eyes on Sienna, I hope they stay true to their mission better than Field.

I think of Siena as equivalent to Lab, not a next step. Whereas pre-pandemic, Field was proud of accepting kids with disabilities -- not as a SN school, but a place that was accommodating and inclusive to those who no longer needed specialized instruction. While the new attitude toward disabilities might serve some students fine, it's a loss to the private school universe.

Field has long been a magnet for parents of special needs kids because it lets parents feel like they have mainstreamed their child in an expensive private school that has some of the bells and whistles of other independent schools---but little to no homework or academic challenge. Field has been desperate for money over the many years since it built out its current campus and has been happy to admit anyone who can pay. But the problem for the kids is that Field has minimal capacity to meet the needs of special needs kids. So those kids languish, get distracted and disruptive, and drag down the entire class. That's the modern Field story. Old timers there will talk about the vision of the founder and of everyone sitting around some broken down mansions in Kalorama counting on an abacus and singing Kumbaya. But those days are long gone and the new Field business plan is to grab as much money as it can by admitting rich kids with significant needs who have parents with too much pride to enroll them in a school actually set up to help them.

Ok, that's just offensive. I'm no fan of Field -- I posted upthread that we are one of the families to which Field promised a lot and delivered little. They were not able to support my autistic child and we left. But while we were there, my child was not disruptive and did not "pull down the class." No one suffered from her presence except her. I promise you that autism and learning disabilities are not contagious.