Happiness at Sidwell...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks, I’m a current HS parent who joined in 9th. Our child was fortunate to have a few options, and I’ve lived in DC long enough to know some/many of the arguments against SFS (“Sadwell,” anyone?). So, we didn’t take the decision lightly. The cost is material to us, an important consideration. After shadow days and multiple events in 8th, our child decided, and was able to articulate, why they wanted to go to SFS. They love it, as do we now. We don’t regret the decision.

No high school experience is easy and neverending fun. They’re not part of the “in” crowd, or a great athlete etc. They’re enjoying their time there, have nice friends and particularly like some of their teachers. There are lots of great options out there, but SFS has been good for them. We’re pleased at how much they’re learning and their growing ability to express themselves and be independent.

Part of the decision is expectations: we don’t expect SFS, or any school, to be a golden ticket to any particular college or path in life. Nor are we an “Ivy League/T20 or Bust” family. We believe they’re being developed to do well wherever they end up next. As expected, junior year is a tough one, and the college expectations and stresses grow substantially. But having friends at lots of the other schools in the area, that’s not at all unique to SFS; it’s a D.C. thing.

This is not to dismiss others’ experiences or pit one school against another; it’s simply to share our very positive experience at Sidwell. I hope this helps.

We’ve had children at multiple Big 3. Sidwell is the lesser by far in happiness factor. Does it mean no one is unhappy at other schools - no. Unhappiness can occur anywhere and it’s always hard to be in many hard classes. Does it mean everyone is unhappy at Sidwell no. But on average - kids at my other kids schools have a much happier journey through HS and are equally prepared for college and get into the same schools (and the unconnected kids face the same hurdles in college admissions) . It’s really noticeably different in cultures. And less happiness at Sidwell is a large factor in that difference.

To clarify, do you have a child at Sidwell? From your note, it's a little unclear.

I have multiple children - one attended Sidwell - others have attended other Big 3 schools .

But maybe that kid is just a less happy person? I don’t mean that unkindly - I also have multiple kids and they are at the same school and they are not equally happy people. And I don’t think that would be different for them at different schools, it’s more about the way they experience the world

[Anonymous]

I feel like there are a few haters who post incessantly about their particular schools, including Sidwell. There’s one for my K-8, too. They no longer have kids there, but feel the need to share their negative experiences anytime anyone shares a positive perspective. I believe their negative experiences are real, but extrapolating them to the majority of family’s experiences isn’t necessarily accurate. If Sidwell was churning out hundreds of miserable kids the parents, students or both would revolt. I’d also like to point out that several of the top liberal arts schools (and all the California schools) that I’ve seen Sidwell grads attend have banned legacy admissions. So the idea that only “connected” kids are getting into good schools seems exaggerated to me. The Ivies have not, but if your definition of top schools is broader and includes schools like Amherst and Stanford, connections aren’t the factor they once were. The last thing I’d like to note is that if you were at the closing performance of the Sidwell musical on Sunday, you’d have heard the heartfelt, teary-eyed speeches of the senior theater students, who spoke passionately about the deeply positive roles their adult theater mentors had played in their time in the upper school. The play was fantastic, and for many students their experiences were clearly transformative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like there are a few haters who post incessantly about their particular schools, including Sidwell. There’s one for my K-8, too. They no longer have kids there, but feel the need to share their negative experiences anytime anyone shares a positive perspective. I believe their negative experiences are real, but extrapolating them to the majority of family’s experiences isn’t necessarily accurate. If Sidwell was churning out hundreds of miserable kids the parents, students or both would revolt. I’d also like to point out that several of the top liberal arts schools (and all the California schools) that I’ve seen Sidwell grads attend have banned legacy admissions. So the idea that only “connected” kids are getting into good schools seems exaggerated to me. The Ivies have not, but if your definition of top schools is broader and includes schools like Amherst and Stanford, connections aren’t the factor they once were. The last thing I’d like to note is that if you were at the closing performance of the Sidwell musical on Sunday, you’d have heard the heartfelt, teary-eyed speeches of the senior theater students, who spoke passionately about the deeply positive roles their adult theater mentors had played in their time in the upper school. The play was fantastic, and for many students their experiences were clearly transformative.

I’m not so sure about this. There are so many successful families that prioritize education and success way above personal happiness and fulfillment. Plenty of people don’t even know how to enjoy life anymore.

[Anonymous]

Bottom line: you aren’t going to get a good answer here. You really need to talk with current families IRL. If you are coming from a private school, they should be able to connect you with an alum family whose child is at the school you are looking at. Other than close personal friends with experience at Sidwell (or wherever you are applying), families from your current school will give you the best intel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks, I’m a current HS parent who joined in 9th. Our child was fortunate to have a few options, and I’ve lived in DC long enough to know some/many of the arguments against SFS (“Sadwell,” anyone?). So, we didn’t take the decision lightly. The cost is material to us, an important consideration. After shadow days and multiple events in 8th, our child decided, and was able to articulate, why they wanted to go to SFS. They love it, as do we now. We don’t regret the decision.

No high school experience is easy and neverending fun. They’re not part of the “in” crowd, or a great athlete etc. They’re enjoying their time there, have nice friends and particularly like some of their teachers. There are lots of great options out there, but SFS has been good for them. We’re pleased at how much they’re learning and their growing ability to express themselves and be independent.

Part of the decision is expectations: we don’t expect SFS, or any school, to be a golden ticket to any particular college or path in life. Nor are we an “Ivy League/T20 or Bust” family. We believe they’re being developed to do well wherever they end up next. As expected, junior year is a tough one, and the college expectations and stresses grow substantially. But having friends at lots of the other schools in the area, that’s not at all unique to SFS; it’s a D.C. thing.

This is not to dismiss others’ experiences or pit one school against another; it’s simply to share our very positive experience at Sidwell. I hope this helps.

We’ve had children at multiple Big 3. Sidwell is the lesser by far in happiness factor. Does it mean no one is unhappy at other schools - no. Unhappiness can occur anywhere and it’s always hard to be in many hard classes. Does it mean everyone is unhappy at Sidwell no. But on average - kids at my other kids schools have a much happier journey through HS and are equally prepared for college and get into the same schools (and the unconnected kids face the same hurdles in college admissions) . It’s really noticeably different in cultures. And less happiness at Sidwell is a large factor in that difference.

To clarify, do you have a child at Sidwell? From your note, it's a little unclear.

I have multiple children - one attended Sidwell - others have attended other Big 3 schools .

But maybe that kid is just a less happy person? I don’t mean that unkindly - I also have multiple kids and they are at the same school and they are not equally happy people. And I don’t think that would be different for them at different schools, it’s more about the way they experience the world

I hear you but it’s not just that child. In any case - I think parents should let the child choose if they options. It’s the child who has to live the experience and they have the the right to choose. But I can comfortably say that in comparing the student body of multiple schools - it’s not fiction that Sidwell is the lowest on happiness factor. It doesn’t mean everyone is miserable but it lacks positive energy found at our other schools - even among kids in hardest classes (which is hard everywhere)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like there are a few haters who post incessantly about their particular schools, including Sidwell. There’s one for my K-8, too. They no longer have kids there, but feel the need to share their negative experiences anytime anyone shares a positive perspective. I believe their negative experiences are real, but extrapolating them to the majority of family’s experiences isn’t necessarily accurate. If Sidwell was churning out hundreds of miserable kids the parents, students or both would revolt. I’d also like to point out that several of the top liberal arts schools (and all the California schools) that I’ve seen Sidwell grads attend have banned legacy admissions. So the idea that only “connected” kids are getting into good schools seems exaggerated to me. The Ivies have not, but if your definition of top schools is broader and includes schools like Amherst and Stanford, connections aren’t the factor they once were. The last thing I’d like to note is that if you were at the closing performance of the Sidwell musical on Sunday, you’d have heard the heartfelt, teary-eyed speeches of the senior theater students, who spoke passionately about the deeply positive roles their adult theater mentors had played in their time in the upper school. The play was fantastic, and for many students their experiences were clearly transformative.

As the unhappiness poster - I do agree that the theater group can be a source of happiness at Sidwell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

I don't think it is a "recent turn to focus to sports" - sports has always been important at Sidwell, but a few of the teams had a rough go in recent years. Look at the banners from the 1950's to 2000's hanging in the gym. Yes, basketball is high profile, but reality is, it just takes one ot two kids in a grade to turn that sport and both varsity coaches understand the academic rigor of the school and are not going to push to admit kids who cannot handle the work and the faculty certainly are not giving anyone a pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it is a very happy place, specially after the 5 million dollars they got during Covid. At the time the board said that grabbing the government money allocated for small businesses was consistent with their Quaker values.

Would you prefer the non-academic staff had been totally laid off during COVID? Because that was the option. The fiduciary responsibility the Board has to the school provided the right response. The school was eligible for the money and as a result, they were able to make payroll during the months when there was no income from non-academic programs. The staff that was held over are to this day, very grateful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is a very happy place, specially after the 5 million dollars they got during Covid. At the time the board said that grabbing the government money allocated for small businesses was consistent with their Quaker values.

Would you prefer the non-academic staff had been totally laid off during COVID? Because that was the option. The fiduciary responsibility the Board has to the school provided the right response. The school was eligible for the money and as a result, they were able to make payroll during the months when there was no income from non-academic programs. The staff that was held over are to this day, very grateful.

Almost every school took the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

TL; DR - my kids can’t actually hack it and it’s good I paid the money to get them in early when it’s easier.

I’m the op who said this op was more accurate. Our dc entered in 9th was highly successful - they could 100% cut it. The place is not warm at all. Very draconian - Senior year the families that gushed at the senior year meeting for worship event were the uber wealthy long timers that Bryan courted - those people all had kids who got into Ivy League on their family connections while taking easiest classes possible. It was gross. They have no clue what the school is really like because they don’t face the same wall (or hand in the face) others do and (except a few) their kids aren’t taking the hardest classes with the teachers who compete with each other to get the label of hardest class in the school.

Again - my dc did great - so no sour grapes. Education is high level but it is not a good ‘school’ - teens need and deserve more out of school thanks grinding out work.

Your entire post reads like sour grapes. There are unhooked Sidwell students admitted to Ivy+ colleges every year who did not taken the hardest classes in every subject, every year. Sorry things didn’t work out that way for your kid. Btw, I don’t think your child did “great” by your standards. If they did, you would not have written this bitter post.

They did do great - that doesn’t mean the school is a happy place or is successful at promoting happiness. Which is what the OP is asking. Getting a great education doesn’t have to be so severe. For those of you in 9th/10th you’ll see this ramp up in 11th/12th.

My oldest daughter actually refers to Sidwell as her “happy place.” That’s because the school is a great fit for her. Sidwell isn’t a great fit for many students who are pushed to attend by their parents. That seems to be the case for your children. You heard all the rumors about Sidwell before you signed the contract, but you still enrolled your child(ren). Why?

You really should stop projecting. Every student isn’t have a miserable experience at Sidwell.

My child chose it - I would have chosen elsewhere. They would chose it again given the same options. But definitely not because it was warm or happy .

Why would your child choose Sidwell again?
Btw, “warm and happy” is very subjective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

I don't think it is a "recent turn to focus to sports" - sports has always been important at Sidwell, but a few of the teams had a rough go in recent years. Look at the banners from the 1950's to 2000's hanging in the gym. Yes, basketball is high profile, but reality is, it just takes one ot two kids in a grade to turn that sport and both varsity coaches understand the academic rigor of the school and are not going to push to admit kids who cannot handle the work and the faculty certainly are not giving anyone a pass.

To be fair to PP - I think these new basketball teams is beyond what you are referring to as a few kids can sway one way or another. There is a clear recruiting push.

But on the flip side - our child didn’t feel it affected academics or academic focus of the school.

The part we found off putting was that in every other way Sidwell points to Quaker values for not celebrating the successes of students to put one above others - yet somehow this went out the window for basketball - not a peep to encourage community to go support a soccer team in state championship but ones for basketball. And no academic awards - but sports awards for seniors. And it’s not like it’s even a huge sports focus school so it was just weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

TL; DR - my kids can’t actually hack it and it’s good I paid the money to get them in early when it’s easier.

I’m the op who said this op was more accurate. Our dc entered in 9th was highly successful - they could 100% cut it. The place is not warm at all. Very draconian - Senior year the families that gushed at the senior year meeting for worship event were the uber wealthy long timers that Bryan courted - those people all had kids who got into Ivy League on their family connections while taking easiest classes possible. It was gross. They have no clue what the school is really like because they don’t face the same wall (or hand in the face) others do and (except a few) their kids aren’t taking the hardest classes with the teachers who compete with each other to get the label of hardest class in the school.

Again - my dc did great - so no sour grapes. Education is high level but it is not a good ‘school’ - teens need and deserve more out of school thanks grinding out work.

Your entire post reads like sour grapes. There are unhooked Sidwell students admitted to Ivy+ colleges every year who did not taken the hardest classes in every subject, every year. Sorry things didn’t work out that way for your kid. Btw, I don’t think your child did “great” by your standards. If they did, you would not have written this bitter post.

They did do great - that doesn’t mean the school is a happy place or is successful at promoting happiness. Which is what the OP is asking. Getting a great education doesn’t have to be so severe. For those of you in 9th/10th you’ll see this ramp up in 11th/12th.

My oldest daughter actually refers to Sidwell as her “happy place.” That’s because the school is a great fit for her. Sidwell isn’t a great fit for many students who are pushed to attend by their parents. That seems to be the case for your children. You heard all the rumors about Sidwell before you signed the contract, but you still enrolled your child(ren). Why?

You really should stop projecting. Every student isn’t have a miserable experience at Sidwell.

My child chose it - I would have chosen elsewhere. They would chose it again given the same options. But definitely not because it was warm or happy .

Why would your child choose Sidwell again?
Btw, “warm and happy” is very subjective.

I think because they didn’t feel like the kids that they know who went to the other two options were ones they’d want to hang with. Liked their Sidwell friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

TL; DR - my kids can’t actually hack it and it’s good I paid the money to get them in early when it’s easier.

I’m the op who said this op was more accurate. Our dc entered in 9th was highly successful - they could 100% cut it. The place is not warm at all. Very draconian - Senior year the families that gushed at the senior year meeting for worship event were the uber wealthy long timers that Bryan courted - those people all had kids who got into Ivy League on their family connections while taking easiest classes possible. It was gross. They have no clue what the school is really like because they don’t face the same wall (or hand in the face) others do and (except a few) their kids aren’t taking the hardest classes with the teachers who compete with each other to get the label of hardest class in the school.

Again - my dc did great - so no sour grapes. Education is high level but it is not a good ‘school’ - teens need and deserve more out of school thanks grinding out work.

Your entire post reads like sour grapes. There are unhooked Sidwell students admitted to Ivy+ colleges every year who did not taken the hardest classes in every subject, every year. Sorry things didn’t work out that way for your kid. Btw, I don’t think your child did “great” by your standards. If they did, you would not have written this bitter post.

They did do great - that doesn’t mean the school is a happy place or is successful at promoting happiness. Which is what the OP is asking. Getting a great education doesn’t have to be so severe. For those of you in 9th/10th you’ll see this ramp up in 11th/12th.

My oldest daughter actually refers to Sidwell as her “happy place.” That’s because the school is a great fit for her. Sidwell isn’t a great fit for many students who are pushed to attend by their parents. That seems to be the case for your children. You heard all the rumors about Sidwell before you signed the contract, but you still enrolled your child(ren). Why?

You really should stop projecting. Every student isn’t have a miserable experience at Sidwell.

My child chose it - I would have chosen elsewhere. They would chose it again given the same options. But definitely not because it was warm or happy .

Why would your child choose Sidwell again?
Btw, “warm and happy” is very subjective.

I think because they didn’t feel like the kids that they know who went to the other two options were ones they’d want to hang with. Liked their Sidwell friends.

So your child liked and wanted to hang out with the Sidwell students more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

I don't think it is a "recent turn to focus to sports" - sports has always been important at Sidwell, but a few of the teams had a rough go in recent years. Look at the banners from the 1950's to 2000's hanging in the gym. Yes, basketball is high profile, but reality is, it just takes one ot two kids in a grade to turn that sport and both varsity coaches understand the academic rigor of the school and are not going to push to admit kids who cannot handle the work and the faculty certainly are not giving anyone a pass.

To be fair to PP - I think these new basketball teams is beyond what you are referring to as a few kids can sway one way or another. There is a clear recruiting push.

But on the flip side - our child didn’t feel it affected academics or academic focus of the school.

The part we found off putting was that in every other way Sidwell points to Quaker values for not celebrating the successes of students to put one above others - yet somehow this went out the window for basketball - not a peep to encourage community to go support a soccer team in state championship but ones for basketball. And no academic awards - but sports awards for seniors. And it’s not like it’s even a huge sports focus school so it was just weird.

I made the original remark about sports. The recruiting for basketball is over the top. And the social media for all sports. The school understands the data that establishes alumni generosity increases with more successful sports programs. Insofar as it running roughshod over academics, that's simply my opinion. Not an absolute truth. I understand curricular adjustments to accommodate the recruiting focus to be a bad look. At least one academic department (challenging subject matter) shared (not widely) that teaching resources were drawn away from the very advanced courses to generate newly-configured ones at the other end of the spectrum explicitly attributable to the effect of recruiting (for all sports). On reliable authority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Slightly different perspective here. All of my US kids are lifers, so maybe that's why I come from a different place. Daily life at US is, despite the advertised virtues, short on the Quaker values implied to be at the core of the school's identity. The virtue signaling is over the top.

It's all relative to what other schools may be like. I don't know any other school so cannot speak to that. But my view is that the school's policies around academics (teacher's interactions with students) are draconian. Definitely not warm.

Also, the school's recent turn of focus to sports has undermined the atmosphere of academic excellence. That, again, just in my opinion, has suffered.

Socially, based on what I have heard from my kids over the years and what some acquaintances have shared, there's as much of a mean-kid culture at Sidwell as at any other school. There are the popular kids, the ahtletes, the mean girls, the 'try hards', and the senior whose mom is on the Board and by all accounts should have been kicked out right now for a few nefarious acts, not to mention running the (against the school policy) poker enterprise in the senior center. And sure, the basketball playoffs are good-spirited. They're the playoffs and attendance at any sporting events at Sidwell do not draw the kids who are not part of the 'in' crowd, or even the generally happy kids.

Have my kids come out with a good education? They graduated (as recently as last year) seem to have. But do I think it is any different than elsewhere, no.

I don't think it is a "recent turn to focus to sports" - sports has always been important at Sidwell, but a few of the teams had a rough go in recent years. Look at the banners from the 1950's to 2000's hanging in the gym. Yes, basketball is high profile, but reality is, it just takes one ot two kids in a grade to turn that sport and both varsity coaches understand the academic rigor of the school and are not going to push to admit kids who cannot handle the work and the faculty certainly are not giving anyone a pass.

To be fair to PP - I think these new basketball teams is beyond what you are referring to as a few kids can sway one way or another. There is a clear recruiting push.

But on the flip side - our child didn’t feel it affected academics or academic focus of the school.

The part we found off putting was that in every other way Sidwell points to Quaker values for not celebrating the successes of students to put one above others - yet somehow this went out the window for basketball - not a peep to encourage community to go support a soccer team in state championship but ones for basketball. And no academic awards - but sports awards for seniors. And it’s not like it’s even a huge sports focus school so it was just weird.

I made the original remark about sports. The recruiting for basketball is over the top. And the social media for all sports. The school understands the data that establishes alumni generosity increases with more successful sports programs. Insofar as it running roughshod over academics, that's simply my opinion. Not an absolute truth. I understand curricular adjustments to accommodate the recruiting focus to be a bad look. At least one academic department (challenging subject matter) shared (not widely) that teaching resources were drawn away from the very advanced courses to generate newly-configured ones at the other end of the spectrum explicitly attributable to the effect of recruiting (for all sports). On reliable authority.

I hear you but my kid was in hardest classes and didn’t lose ability to be there due to lack of teachers (from being pulled away to lower levels). And they were never in classes with top recruits from either basketball team so it had zero impact. They did say the girls players were super down to earth.

The social media on sports is at all schools - even ones with all just marginal teams.(we’ve been at other high schools too) So I wouldn’t let that bother you

Anyway - I still think the attention allowed by athletic dept and school to only celebrate/promote successes of one team is off. others are successful too. And Especially when there are no kudos to shout out the successes of kids while doing other non-sport achievements. That’s un-Quakerly but basketball and senior sports awards apparently are Quakerly?

Disclaimer- No knocking basketball teams is intended in these remarks! It’s not their fault