Norwood: What do you love? Not Love?

[Anonymous]

On anti-intellectualism, since I was the one who raised it: that doesn't mean (a) the parents aren't educated or (b) high powered or (c) geeks are picked on all the time. More that parents are ultra, ultra concerned about kids' sports and social development. That is what I've seen there. Others may have different experiences - kids who get really excited about some ideas, find peers who are also interested, find teachers who will take extra time to draw them out, and so forth. Again, not my experience.

[Anonymous]

PP, I am curious about how you derived the view that parents are ultra concerned about kids' sports and social development and not academics. Have you had a bunch of conversations at carpool with a bunch of parents who have said, "I don't care that little Jimmy is struggling in math so long as he scores two goals at the game Saturday?"

I have to tell you, I care a lot - A LOT - about academics. At carpool or whatever, I am much more likely to talk about the latest parenting issue with Kid A or respond to a question about Kid B's sport and how another kid can get involved. I do NOT talk about the glowing progress report Kid A got in Subject X last year and how we are really hoping Kid B does well in Subject Y. In the same vein, I don't wear my or my spouse's substantial academic credentials on my sleeve or my kids' WPPSI scores. I would take this same view regardless of where my kids were enrolled in school. To do otherwise would foster competition among the students and parents at the school. I handle my academic business with the school, and my questions about curriculum, placement and enrichment, out of the public eye. I suspect many others do as well. If that makes Norwood "anti-intellectual," I would not have it any other way.

[Anonymous]

I have also witnessed this anti-intellectual (or just intellect-lacking) aspect of Norwood. Many of the families we see there tend to be ultra-concerned with everything BUT the academics. While we like the school in many respects, it does bother me that there isn't more of an intellectual feel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have also witnessed this anti-intellectual (or just intellect-lacking) aspect of Norwood. Many of the families we see there tend to be ultra-concerned with everything BUT the academics. While we like the school in many respects, it does bother me that there isn't more of an intellectual feel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have also witnessed this anti-intellectual (or just intellect-lacking) aspect of Norwood. Many of the families we see there tend to be ultra-concerned with everything BUT the academics. While we like the school in many respects, it does bother me that there isn't more of an intellectual feel.

Agree

[Anonymous]

It is a K-8 school, so you will find a less academic feel b/c the more academic subjects that come up in HS are not there because it is NOT high school.

[Anonymous]

RE: Bullying
There is a very hands off approach to discipline on the playground. This tends to favor more aggressive/physical children from an early age. Some parents are put out by this and some children are intimidated.

Additionally, when parents choose children for rec sports teams (MSI, BCC baseball) the more aggressive/physical group is cherrypicked by the parents/coaches and the remaining kids are on what everyone knows is the B squad. This tends to reinforce a pecking order dominated by the more aggressive boys.

This does not happen in every grade but it does happen. Really depends on the parent mix.

As for anti- intellectual- It is probably true. But as a pp said being anti- intellectual does not necessarily equal unacademic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RE: Bullying
There is a very hands off approach to discipline on the playground. This tends to favor more aggressive/physical children from an early age. Some parents are put out by this and some children are intimidated.

Additionally, when parents choose children for rec sports teams (MSI, BCC baseball) the more aggressive/physical group is cherrypicked by the parents/coaches and the remaining kids are on what everyone knows is the B squad. This tends to reinforce a pecking order dominated by the more aggressive boys.

This does not happen in every grade but it does happen. Really depends on the parent mix.

As for anti- intellectual- It is probably true. But as a pp said being anti- intellectual does not necessarily equal unacademic.

We have a child at Norwood. At what age would you say this starts? I hear about it in first grade this year.

[Anonymous]

On the intellectual front. I think it is a cultural thing at Norwood and the surrounding area. Most of my friends (parents) at Norwood are very highly educated, but are not in academic circles, so they don't wear their "intellect" on their sleeves.

The families tend to be the smart, well-rounded types that attended Duke, UVA, Harvard, etc. They were athletes (many) and students, and are a pretty impressive crowd. Their children seem to reflect those backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RE: Bullying
There is a very hands off approach to discipline on the playground. This tends to favor more aggressive/physical children from an early age. Some parents are put out by this and some children are intimidated.

Additionally, when parents choose children for rec sports teams (MSI, BCC baseball) the more aggressive/physical group is cherrypicked by the parents/coaches and the remaining kids are on what everyone knows is the B squad. This tends to reinforce a pecking order dominated by the more aggressive boys.

This does not happen in every grade but it does happen. Really depends on the parent mix.

As for anti- intellectual- It is probably true. But as a pp said being anti- intellectual does not necessarily equal unacademic.

I think you are really missing the truth here - itrs the more athletic kids (or boys in this case) who firstget toigether to form rec teams. Children with similar interests (in this case athletics) tend to attract each other. Thsi is readily apparent during free recess. However, athleticism does not equal agression, although admittedlky, some athletic kids are more aggressive than the norm. In this scenario, you are using the term "aggressive" to negatively characterize children becuase you do not like that betterathletes tend to want to play together. I would be willing to guess that youare not as quick to be upset when more academically advanced (or gifted) kids are grouped together for a math class or a reading group. It is exactly the same thing however. I was not an athletically gifted child. I was an acaedmically gifted child. I never felt that it was a bad thing for me to be on a "B" team as it was the correct placement for me, just as my advanced classes were the correct fit for me. Instead of reflexively labeling athletic kids who join/form on teams based on ability, as aggressive , perhaps you should learn to look more closesly at all such groupiungs of children. Your statements is grossly generalizing and reflects your personal bias.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RE: Bullying
There is a very hands off approach to discipline on the playground. This tends to favor more aggressive/physical children from an early age. Some parents are put out by this and some children are intimidated.

Additionally, when parents choose children for rec sports teams (MSI, BCC baseball) the more aggressive/physical group is cherrypicked by the parents/coaches and the remaining kids are on what everyone knows is the B squad. This tends to reinforce a pecking order dominated by the more aggressive boys.

This does not happen in every grade but it does happen. Really depends on the parent mix.

As for anti- intellectual- It is probably true. But as a pp said being anti- intellectual does not necessarily equal unacademic.

I think you are really missing the truth here - itrs the more athletic kids (or boys in this case) who firstget toigether to form rec teams. Children with similar interests (in this case athletics) tend to attract each other. Thsi is readily apparent during free recess. However, athleticism does not equal agression, although admittedlky, some athletic kids are more aggressive than the norm. In this scenario, you are using the term "aggressive" to negatively characterize children becuase you do not like that betterathletes tend to want to play together. I would be willing to guess that youare not as quick to be upset when more academically advanced (or gifted) kids are grouped together for a math class or a reading group. It is exactly the same thing however. I was not an athletically gifted child. I was an acaedmically gifted child. I never felt that it was a bad thing for me to be on a "B" team as it was the correct placement for me, just as my advanced classes were the correct fit for me. Instead of reflexively labeling athletic kids who join/form on teams based on ability, as aggressive , perhaps you should learn to look more closesly at all such groupiungs of children. Your statements is grossly generalizing and reflects your personal bias.

I completely agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Discussion turned to bullying and the perception of bullying. Unfortunately your responses indicate why Norwood is perceived as being unresponsive to this issue. Defensive much? You have no idea whether I have aggressive/physical kids. My kids may even be part of the group I am describing. Doesn't make it any less true.
I am not going to argue the sillyness of "athletic boys getting together to form rec teams" pre Kindergarten. Just ridiculous.

The playground issue sufaces every year. If you can't acknowledge that, I don't what school your are going to. Perhaps your should check your biases.

I used the word aggressive in order to attempt to deflate the bully discussion. You brought up athleticism. I could have been refering to physically aggressive kids who chase, push, hit.. In fact, I was? What is the athletic problem you are so quick to defend? Want to share more?

[Anonymous]

Norwood actually has a school policy (and has had for years) about how rec teams can be formed (and open spots be filled) so the above statement about cherrypicking is impossible. The school made the policy years ago to combat the very issue you state. The policy is that if more than two teams might form for a particular sport in any grade then a coach and manager are identified and their children become the first two on each team (sometimes a third is added if an assistant coach is necessary). The remaining players are assigned teams by picking out of a hat (the head of the LS actually does this). If more kids are interested in a rec team than there are spots, the same pull out of a hat system is applied with the remaining kids being placed on the teams waitlist in the particular order they were pulled out of the hat. When a spot opens up, coaches go down the waitlist asking if they want the spot. If a team does not agree to abide by this system, they are not allowed to use Norwood fields for practice. As a parent at Norwood who had children go through the lower school recently, I found this policy to be extremely proactive. Now as the kids get older a select team may begin to form which requires tryouts by MSI rules, etc and then this doesn't apply. But in the beginning when the first teams are formed the school makes a huge statement that they want to combat this problem head on. On the bullying comments, both my children at different key grades have participated in proactive small group discussions and games with the counselors to discuss issues that may arise and brainstorm how to handle them. There is great information for parents on the website and frequent communication (by email) from the counselors updating parents on discussions so you as a parent can continue the conversation at home. Previous posters have said the school doesn't deal with these issues head on. I just haven't seen that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Norwood actually has a school policy (and has had for years) about how rec teams can be formed (and open spots be filled) so the above statement about cherrypicking is impossible. The school made the policy years ago to combat the very issue you state. The policy is that if more than two teams might form for a particular sport in any grade then a coach and manager are identified and their children become the first two on each team (sometimes a third is added if an assistant coach is necessary). The remaining players are assigned teams by picking out of a hat (the head of the LS actually does this). If more kids are interested in a rec team than there are spots, the same pull out of a hat system is applied with the remaining kids being placed on the teams waitlist in the particular order they were pulled out of the hat. When a spot opens up, coaches go down the waitlist asking if they want the spot. If a team does not agree to abide by this system, they are not allowed to use Norwood fields for practice. As a parent at Norwood who had children go through the lower school recently, I found this policy to be extremely proactive. Now as the kids get older a select team may begin to form which requires tryouts by MSI rules, etc and then this doesn't apply. But in the beginning when the first teams are formed the school makes a huge statement that they want to combat this problem head on. On the bullying comments, both my children at different key grades have participated in proactive small group discussions and games with the counselors to discuss issues that may arise and brainstorm how to handle them. There is great information for parents on the website and frequent communication (by email) from the counselors updating parents on discussions so you as a parent can continue the conversation at home. Previous posters have said the school doesn't deal with these issues head on. I just haven't seen that.

Yes, this is a great idea. Not always abided by, as many can attest.

[Anonymous]

Responding to 17:16 about how I know ... spent many years talking to people, etc. You may have a different experience. I'm just sharing my views. But just because your experience was different doesn't mean my head was in the sand and I have no perspective. A bit defensive you are.

There are plenty of pretty smart kids there. But some of these kids - especially girls - are uncomfortable in e.g. the top math group (if they get put there in the first place, which isn't frequent) may decide it is against their social interest to go the the top group (with support of parents). I know a boy who had the same reaction. To me, this says something about the culture.