Sidwell Friends School parent tries to sabotage another student to get an edge for her kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but this demonstrates that the lame duck Sidwell college counseling director is a prima donna:

:'While I often arrive at the office well before 8:00 a.m., that does not mean a parent should ever be waiting for me in the vestibule, parking lot, or outside my office door," Gallagher wrote.

Experienced teachers and staff know that if a matter is urgent, a parent may stop in before school to try to have a quick word or set a later time to talk. While I agree about not lurking in the the parking lot, the rest is silly and indicates a certain stubbornness and frankly a lazy approach to engagement on the part of the writer.

You are absolutely incorrect. What on earth is so urgent (and would only take a minute) that you'd have to stalk someone's office door, lurk in the shadows of a parking garage, or hijacking their personal space? That just reeks of wealthy entitlement. How about treating them as professionals, respecting their time, and making an appointment?

You are the one that is off base. That is not hijacking personal space, it is dealing with someone who doesn't respond to e-mails. How bout them doing the job their paid for in the first place.

[Anonymous]

I’d say that it is clear why the director is being pushed out, along with the incompetent junior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a Sidwell parent but love how the school handled this. We applied our child out of k8 and I would feed if parents would try this to help hurt placement chances for other kids. Sidwell saying they are basically not interested in gossip (and it is gossip since all stories or many have two sides) says a great deal about the school. Hope all schools act in a similar fashion.

Unless it’s true and it often ends up being true because they usually ask around to verify it in my experience working with admissions. They keep their sources confidential but they definitely do the legwork and ask around. Trust me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s terrible if true. Is the letter true that was sent? Is the kid cheating or something else nefarious?

The crazed parent thought that the school might cover up the suspension of a well-connected student for sneaking booze into a school event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s terrible if true. Is the letter true that was sent? Is the kid cheating or something else nefarious?

The crazed parent thought that the school might cover up the suspension of a well-connected student for sneaking booze into a school event.

Like a dance or a daytime event? Must be more to it than that.

[Anonymous]

The truth is this happens a lot and it may have been previously mentioned but kids do this to each other too. For instance, forwarding incriminating fb posts to colleges to try knock out competition. That a parent is doing it is news to me, not that it happens

[Anonymous]

A student is supposed to disclose serious disciplinary actions, including suspensions, and the school also has to disclose them on the college report as well - no matter who the student is.

[Anonymous]

My kid is only in middle school now, but I keep an oppo research dossier on all the other kids (and their parents) that I will fill over the next few years. It's important that colleges know the truth about DC's competitors, I mean classmates.

[Anonymous]

I love all the DCUM posters saying they are shocked and would never do that to another student.

And then they gleefully chime in on a multi-page thread that basically says “your school choice sucks because,” trashing with a broad brush the kids who attend that public/private/charter school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid is only in middle school now, but I keep an oppo research dossier on all the other kids (and their parents) that I will fill over the next few years. It's important that colleges know the truth about DC's competitors, I mean classmates.

Best post ever......this is sarcasm, right? thread is about Sidwell parents' crazy obsession with 'brand'. Part of the brilliance of this post is the plausibility that it may not be sarcasm!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but this demonstrates that the lame duck Sidwell college counseling director is a prima donna:

:'While I often arrive at the office well before 8:00 a.m., that does not mean a parent should ever be waiting for me in the vestibule, parking lot, or outside my office door," Gallagher wrote.

Experienced teachers and staff know that if a matter is urgent, a parent may stop in before school to try to have a quick word or set a later time to talk. While I agree about not lurking in the the parking lot, the rest is silly and indicates a certain stubbornness and frankly a lazy approach to engagement on the part of the writer.

You are absolutely incorrect. What on earth is so urgent (and would only take a minute) that you'd have to stalk someone's office door, lurk in the shadows of a parking garage, or hijacking their personal space? That just reeks of wealthy entitlement. How about treating them as professionals, respecting their time, and making an appointment?

You are the one that is off base. That is not hijacking personal space, it is dealing with someone who doesn't respond to e-mails. How bout them doing the job their paid for in the first place.

Our family worked with Patrick and we NEVER had an issue with him seeing us or taking extra time to work with our DC. Maybe that’s because we treated him with respect, didn’t try to sabotage other students, acted like grown-ups and didn’t stalk him in the parking garage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry, but this demonstrates that the lame duck Sidwell college counseling director is a prima donna:

:'While I often arrive at the office well before 8:00 a.m., that does not mean a parent should ever be waiting for me in the vestibule, parking lot, or outside my office door," Gallagher wrote.

Experienced teachers and staff know that if a matter is urgent, a parent may stop in before school to try to have a quick word or set a later time to talk. While I agree about not lurking in the the parking lot, the rest is silly and indicates a certain stubbornness and frankly a lazy approach to engagement on the part of the writer.

You are absolutely incorrect. What on earth is so urgent (and would only take a minute) that you'd have to stalk someone's office door, lurk in the shadows of a parking garage, or hijacking their personal space? That just reeks of wealthy entitlement. How about treating them as professionals, respecting their time, and making an appointment?

You are the one that is off base. That is not hijacking personal space, it is dealing with someone who doesn't respond to e-mails. How bout them doing the job their paid for in the first place.

Our family worked with Patrick and we NEVER had an issue with him seeing us or taking extra time to work with our DC. Maybe that’s because we treated him with respect, didn’t try to sabotage other students, acted like grown-ups and didn’t stalk him in the parking garage.

And you thanked your lucky stars that your senior wasn’t assigned to AO.

[Anonymous]

I find myself sympathetic to the need of catching the Director of Admissions on the fly. We had a similar experience with the former director that is returning. We had a series of of concerns about the assigned counselor who was nice but struggling. It was impossible to talk to the director even after making an appointment. Much to our surprise, she replaced our meeting last minute with one with the counselor. Aloof would be a good description of that time and subsequent interactions. We loved Sidwell and it's faculty. They are smart, on target and open to listening including bringing in others as needed. The interactions had we had with college counseling was a polar opposite. In our experience the directors have not been good managers and distant to families not within their own counseling group. Perhaps the issue lies in understaffing but to work towards adequate support for ALL students IMO should be the #1 goal of the position. A high EQ would help too to deal with a period that is stressful for all concerned. I have no idea what would have reputedly caused parents to go off the rails like that but not everyone handles stress well. I would hope that a head of College Counseling would be experienced enough and kind enough to be able to manage that without a school wide letter going out. Perhaps that position should not have it's own group of students to manage so that he/she could maintain objectivity and time for all.

[Anonymous]

This was posted in another thread, but it's so beautifully written. There's not enough money in any school's budget for me to be a college counselor.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/what-college-admissions-scandal-reveals/586468/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was posted in another thread, but it's so beautifully written. There's not enough money in any school's budget for me to be a college counselor.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/what-college-admissions-scandal-reveals/586468/

This is not even remotely beautiful. The writer has such a chip on her shoulder that she can't even get her facts straight.