Saying no to Sidwell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a lot of us, the fact that Sidwell doesn't bow down to the mighty athlete, and doesn't seem to have much of a jock culture is one of the big reasons we chose it. It's not really a bad thing for schools to focus on actual learning.

Yeah, because excellence in the classroom and on the athletic field are mutually exclusive things ...

It may be. In part, deep learning is a function of time. The more students have to split their time, and mental efforts, among different activities, the less time they have to focus on academics.

Right. Human beings can only excel in an activity if it's done to the exclusion of others. So your definition of a quality education is academics only. Extra-curriculars are just nonsense, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a lot of us, the fact that Sidwell doesn't bow down to the mighty athlete, and doesn't seem to have much of a jock culture is one of the big reasons we chose it. It's not really a bad thing for schools to focus on actual learning.

Yeah, because excellence in the classroom and on the athletic field are mutually exclusive things ...

It may be. In part, deep learning is a function of time. The more students have to split their time, and mental efforts, among different activities, the less time they have to focus on academics.

Right. Human beings can only excel in an activity if it's done to the exclusion of others. So your definition of a quality education is academics only. Extra-curriculars are just nonsense, right?

No, they are not nonsense. But, if you give both equal weight, you put the student at an academic disadvantage.