Best private schools in NYC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m also wondering—does Hunter’s curriculum truly cater to gifted children, or is their strong college placement more about selecting top students early on? I’ve heard that the most successful students at Hunter High tend to be those who test in at 7th grade rather than those who stay from K through 12. Is that true?

Totally true and I even had a Hunter teacher say almost those exact words to me last year. That's no one fault- it's just that you cant identify elite talent as well at K vs 7th.

It's no one's fault, but it does make you question the purpose of the elementary school. I personally think the elementary school should only admit low income students from low SES zip codes. There's a case for a free school that can potentially "catch" gifted kids before they slip through the cracks of a poor educational system. I don't see the purpose of offering a free education to parents who can afford Dalton, or live in the PS 6 zone. Sorry.

Well, Hunter's purpose is not charity - isn't it research? And all kids in this country are offered a free education...

Hunter hasn't been a real laboratory school for decades. I think it is shameful for them to admit boldface names, especially in the elementary school, when it isn't even clear the kids are really gifted. Hunter is of course, an excellent, free education. Which is why those seats should go to children who would otherwise receive a subpar education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are comparing Hunter to a TT private, Hunter almost certainly means a better chance at an elite college. If you compare Hunter to a less prestigious private, it’s not as clear because while the less rigorous private has a less impressive college matriculation list than the TTs, your kid may have a better chance re college there (as compared to Hunter or any TT) if he or she is at the very top of their class at the lower ranked school and it will be easier to attain that rank at the less rigorous school.

Re the Hunter curriculum, in the early years, it’s not much different than a TT private, but they move faster because the privates devote time to social/emotional learning and Hunter spends very little time on that. The curriculum is more flexible than at a traditional private and if a kid has a real aptitude for a subject they allow them to go a little deeper. It’s definitely not an emergent curriculum, though, like you’d find at a progressive private. Sometimes Hunter is thought of as progressive but it’s not. By second grade, Hunter starts to move quite a bit faster and there also are more opportunities for kids to pursue individual interests. Not all subjects are equal. For example, in elementary school Hunter’s foreign language program is an introduction to Spanish, but the goal isn’t for kids to learn to speak because they don’t devote enough time to it. The kids become familiar with basic words, pronunciation and sentence structure. If they really want to become proficient, they have to supplement outside or wait until HS which begins at 7th grade when there are more and better language options.

Hunter probably is better at teaching gifted kids just because 100 percent of the kids fall in to that bucket. They use a lot of games and creative approaches. And everything is treated as an opportunity to learn. But it’s the kids not the curriculum that is the biggest differentiator. The kids are all v smart and most are curious. Hunter is a place where nerds are wholly accepted and kids think chess and physics and overall learning are cool. There isnt much social pressure to wear nice clothes or certain brands or to be good looking or popular. There is some premium placed on being a good athlete but less than you’d find at most other schools. The downside to the celebration of academic passion/achievement is that on average the kids are not as socially adept and the school provides much less support for social and emotional development.

For better and worse, young kids also have more independence and less supervision at Hunter than at most other schools.

I have a kid at Hunter. We like it but don’t love it. My kid is getting a phenomenal education but I think social/emotional education and support is more important than academics and they aren’t getting much of that. There are people that never would have considered private because it would have been totally out of reach or because they don’t believe in private school. There are others who easily could afford private but chose Hunter because it was the perfect fit for their kid or their family. Those are the groups that love the school. Among upper middle class parents who could pay for private but whose finances aren’t so comfortable that the money means nothing, I think most would have preferred private but chose Hunter because it’s tuition free. We would have gone to private if the money wasn’t meaningful to us. Because the money was meaningful to us, we went with Hunter and decided that if our kid wants to explore other options later—particularly in 7th when Hunter kids start HS or in 9th when a lot of seats open at the privates, we will support that. I doubt our kid will want to move because friend groups are so important at those ages but we will support it if they do.

Among the top HS students more come from the cohort that enters in 7th grade because the HS entrance exam test is identifying kids who have both ability and real intensity since all kids study for that exam and it’s competitive. The kids who enter at K are on average more creative and may rely more on innate ability and passion. Think physicists vs engineers.

Could you please elaborate for those families that think Hunter is a better fit for their kids than TT private, what does that fit exactly look like?

[Anonymous]

Intellectually curious kids who are self directed seem to do well. It helps if the kid is confident or, if the kid is neither confident nor social, it helps if the kid is more jazzed about learning than social standing/fitting in with a peer group. Nerdy kids who are passionate about a particular area will do better at Hunter than elsewhere. The Chess team is cool at Hunter. There are plenty of bright, well rounded kids at Hunter too, but they’d fit at any school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Intellectually curious kids who are self directed seem to do well. It helps if the kid is confident or, if the kid is neither confident nor social, it helps if the kid is more jazzed about learning than social standing/fitting in with a peer group. Nerdy kids who are passionate about a particular area will do better at Hunter than elsewhere. The Chess team is cool at Hunter. There are plenty of bright, well rounded kids at Hunter too, but they’d fit at any school.

Sounds like someone who is both smart and social / charismatic can really thrive at Hunter? Because there is less individualized attention or handholding? So better for someone who naturally have those soft skills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Similar question to the prior poster—but in reverse. My child made it to round 2 at Hunter. Our preschool director indicated that Dalton really liked us so we sent them a first choice letter (hedging a bit in case we get into Hunter) and we applied to a handful of other UES privates. The odds of Hunter are still long but is it actually so much better academically than Dalton? As a family we felt more at home at Dalton, but if the education and college opportunities my kid would get at Hunter are significantly better than what Dalton can offer, we’d choose Hunter.

Curious ho did you hedge your fc letter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Intellectually curious kids who are self directed seem to do well. It helps if the kid is confident or, if the kid is neither confident nor social, it helps if the kid is more jazzed about learning than social standing/fitting in with a peer group. Nerdy kids who are passionate about a particular area will do better at Hunter than elsewhere. The Chess team is cool at Hunter. There are plenty of bright, well rounded kids at Hunter too, but they’d fit at any school.

TBF, nerdy kids are popular at most of the TT privates. Everyone wants to go to good colleges - maybe some are a bit more socially advanced in one way or another. But Dalton’s chess team’s won state, national and world championships. The model UN team wins the national competition so frequently that other schools used to rag on us in forums (i went there years ago and I’m still involved in the community. My nephew is currently a kindergartner, too). Few things are nerdier than hyper-ambitious kids in jacket and tie applying realpolitik to fictional global problems. But the greatest thing about Dalton in particular - as opposed to some of the other privates - is their teaching methodology allows for a lot of self-directed study so each student can pursue their specific areas of interest beyond regular coursework.

I’m not comparing hunter with Dalton - i think it’s too difficult to make a fair comparison. both are great, it’s simply a difference in access to resources. But Dalton’s chess is completely nerdy, we may have just been better at hiding it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intellectually curious kids who are self directed seem to do well. It helps if the kid is confident or, if the kid is neither confident nor social, it helps if the kid is more jazzed about learning than social standing/fitting in with a peer group. Nerdy kids who are passionate about a particular area will do better at Hunter than elsewhere. The Chess team is cool at Hunter. There are plenty of bright, well rounded kids at Hunter too, but they’d fit at any school.

TBF, nerdy kids are popular at most of the TT privates. Everyone wants to go to good colleges - maybe some are a bit more socially advanced in one way or another. But Dalton’s chess team’s won state, national and world championships. The model UN team wins the national competition so frequently that other schools used to rag on us in forums (i went there years ago and I’m still involved in the community. My nephew is currently a kindergartner, too). Few things are nerdier than hyper-ambitious kids in jacket and tie applying realpolitik to fictional global problems. But the greatest thing about Dalton in particular - as opposed to some of the other privates - is their teaching methodology allows for a lot of self-directed study so each student can pursue their specific areas of interest beyond regular coursework.

I’m not comparing hunter with Dalton - i think it’s too difficult to make a fair comparison. both are great, it’s simply a difference in access to resources. But Dalton’s chess is completely nerdy, we may have just been better at hiding it.

Quick addition if it wasn’t clear: I’m a dalton grad.

[Anonymous]

Hedged the FC letter by indicating that it was our first choice independent school

[Anonymous]

A smart and charismatic kid will thrive at any school but they may have more of a competitive advantage at Hunter because there are more socially awkward kids there and, as the Dalton poster noted, there are far fewer resources at Hunter. Hunter does not do a good a job at supporting kids who lack soft skills. Privates have resources to support all kids in all ways. Of course, with the 65k per year you are saving you also can find independent resources to assist your kid.

[Anonymous]

St Bs v Collegiate? Prefer St Bs and live on the UES but don’t want boarding school and the parents at our preschool seem to think Collegiate is better academically. We thought the St B kids looked happier and to us the curriculum seemed more rigorous?

[Anonymous]

As someone who grew up in NYC, stayed here through college and law school, and has lots of friends who went to specialized high schools, Hunter, and privates ranging from TT to small independent schools, here's what I've seen:

Hunter kids tended to come from solidly middle class families, and now that we're in our 40s, have all ended up living solidly middle class lives. They're nurses, lawyers (personal injury or insurance defense, not big law), and teachers. They went to solid colleges and solid grad schools, but for whatever reason, never quite made it into the upper stratosphere. Small independent privates (catholic schools, charters) have ended up around the same.

TT private kids almost all fall in the upper middle class to upper class. They are big law partners, hedge fund managers, investment bankers, and CEOs. Many of them can attribute that primarily to having wealthy parents who set them on that path, but there are a few who didn't come from wealth but were able to ride the coattails of their peers in their private HS and have done very well for themselves. I wouldn't say the TT private kids are noticeably smarter than anyone else I know, generally, but they are among the most successful.

Specialized high school kids generally came from middle to upper middle class families, and have climbed the ranks to become very successful. They are also some of the most type A, intelligent, hard working people I know. They have the same types of careers as the TT private kids, but seem to be happier and more grounded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who grew up in NYC, stayed here through college and law school, and has lots of friends who went to specialized high schools, Hunter, and privates ranging from TT to small independent schools, here's what I've seen:

Hunter kids tended to come from solidly middle class families, and now that we're in our 40s, have all ended up living solidly middle class lives. They're nurses, lawyers (personal injury or insurance defense, not big law), and teachers. They went to solid colleges and solid grad schools, but for whatever reason, never quite made it into the upper stratosphere. Small independent privates (catholic schools, charters) have ended up around the same.

TT private kids almost all fall in the upper middle class to upper class. They are big law partners, hedge fund managers, investment bankers, and CEOs. Many of them can attribute that primarily to having wealthy parents who set them on that path, but there are a few who didn't come from wealth but were able to ride the coattails of their peers in their private HS and have done very well for themselves. I wouldn't say the TT private kids are noticeably smarter than anyone else I know, generally, but they are among the most successful.

Specialized high school kids generally came from middle to upper middle class families, and have climbed the ranks to become very successful. They are also some of the most type A, intelligent, hard working people I know. They have the same types of careers as the TT private kids, but seem to be happier and more grounded.

I don’t mean to spur a debate and won’t contribute anymore after this. But since this is one of the oldest, most boring and overly discussed arguments that arises whenever there’s a comparison made between private and specialized schools, I just have to say that obviously this isn’t true. the reality is more nuanced.

Yes, private schools do have lots of rich people, many of whom will get their careers through their parents and will wind up in big law or in management consulting or in pe or running their family companies. But many of us wind up working for DwB, for NGOs, or becoming DA’s and public defenders or local politicians. Lots of us became teachers. I even know a couple of traditional “healers”. There are writers, journalists, filmmakers, artists, archivists, etc. who make tremendous personal and professional sacrifices to achieve goals in pursuit of passion or a sense of justice and fairness, not simply financial gain or prestige. I can’t speak for anyone else - and I won’t - but I would say, aside from a handful of the SUPER wealthy and those with very clear ambitions - a plurality of my graduating class, as well as many of our peer institutions - didn’t chase money.

This idea of lower-middle-to-middle class students coattailing to financial success isn’t limited to private schools - it occurs everywhere, in public and private schools. It continues in college, then in grad school if you wind up going to one. It’s just a means for survival in a competitive world. And there are plenty of quite wealthy kids at hunter, too.

Going to private school doesn’t preordain the outcomes of your contribution to society or your personal gains anymore than public school condemns you to others. And, of course, many, many private school students are wildly type a - i mean insanely, to the point of being anal, borderline in need of therapy type a. My classmates were and are wildly intelligent, curious, passionate, lifelong lovers of learning, and the sheer amount of homework you get once you hit high school requires an absurd amount of effort, time, and dedication to whatever subjects you’re doing. If you’re not a devoted student or a genius, you won’t survive.

None of this is to take away from the experience of a specialized high school nor the talents/work ethic/abilities. It’s just sort of, really? Are we going to fall back on these tired, old tropes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who grew up in NYC, stayed here through college and law school, and has lots of friends who went to specialized high schools, Hunter, and privates ranging from TT to small independent schools, here's what I've seen:

The times have changed. You will find many Hunter and Specialized High School parents ranting publicly or privately on how their elite kid has to spend their entire life working to afford the basic necessities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who grew up in NYC, stayed here through college and law school, and has lots of friends who went to specialized high schools, Hunter, and privates ranging from TT to small independent schools, here's what I've seen:

Hunter kids tended to come from solidly middle class families, and now that we're in our 40s, have all ended up living solidly middle class lives. They're nurses, lawyers (personal injury or insurance defense, not big law), and teachers. They went to solid colleges and solid grad schools, but for whatever reason, never quite made it into the upper stratosphere. Small independent privates (catholic schools, charters) have ended up around the same.

TT private kids almost all fall in the upper middle class to upper class. They are big law partners, hedge fund managers, investment bankers, and CEOs. Many of them can attribute that primarily to having wealthy parents who set them on that path, but there are a few who didn't come from wealth but were able to ride the coattails of their peers in their private HS and have done very well for themselves. I wouldn't say the TT private kids are noticeably smarter than anyone else I know, generally, but they are among the most successful.

Specialized high school kids generally came from middle to upper middle class families, and have climbed the ranks to become very successful. They are also some of the most type A, intelligent, hard working people I know. They have the same types of careers as the TT private kids, but seem to be happier and more grounded.

I don’t mean to spur a debate and won’t contribute anymore after this. But since this is one of the oldest, most boring and overly discussed arguments that arises whenever there’s a comparison made between private and specialized schools, I just have to say that obviously this isn’t true. the reality is more nuanced.

Yes, private schools do have lots of rich people, many of whom will get their careers through their parents and will wind up in big law or in management consulting or in pe or running their family companies. But many of us wind up working for DwB, for NGOs, or becoming DA’s and public defenders or local politicians. Lots of us became teachers. I even know a couple of traditional “healers”. There are writers, journalists, filmmakers, artists, archivists, etc. who make tremendous personal and professional sacrifices to achieve goals in pursuit of passion or a sense of justice and fairness, not simply financial gain or prestige. I can’t speak for anyone else - and I won’t - but I would say, aside from a handful of the SUPER wealthy and those with very clear ambitions - a plurality of my graduating class, as well as many of our peer institutions - didn’t chase money.

This idea of lower-middle-to-middle class students coattailing to financial success isn’t limited to private schools - it occurs everywhere, in public and private schools. It continues in college, then in grad school if you wind up going to one. It’s just a means for survival in a competitive world. And there are plenty of quite wealthy kids at hunter, too.

Going to private school doesn’t preordain the outcomes of your contribution to society or your personal gains anymore than public school condemns you to others. And, of course, many, many private school students are wildly type a - i mean insanely, to the point of being anal, borderline in need of therapy type a. My classmates were and are wildly intelligent, curious, passionate, lifelong lovers of learning, and the sheer amount of homework you get once you hit high school requires an absurd amount of effort, time, and dedication to whatever subjects you’re doing. If you’re not a devoted student or a genius, you won’t survive.

None of this is to take away from the experience of a specialized high school nor the talents/work ethic/abilities. It’s just sort of, really? Are we going to fall back on these tired, old tropes?

Not to pile on, but at the risk of getting pummeled here, the super rich, re:children of billionaires, at the TT private I went to (all girls) were very smart, hardworking, kind, and often quite shy to the point that you never would have known. One of my good friends, who I still see regularly, became an elementary school teacher and lives a lowkey existence. Another from a very prominent family helps run a nonprofit distributing grants to advance scientific discovery. she majored in biochemistry in college, graduating PBK - we went to the same college, she was two years before me.

I’ve heard horror stories, too: children of certain athletes and celebrities in some of the coed schools (shoutout trinity) being complete and total entitled d-bags, but i never experienced it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:St Bs v Collegiate? Prefer St Bs and live on the UES but don’t want boarding school and the parents at our preschool seem to think Collegiate is better academically. We thought the St B kids looked happier and to us the curriculum seemed more rigorous?

I have heard multiple Collegiate folks say that the St Bs kids who joined them in 9th grade were absolute stars and ended up doing the best in their classes at C for high school.