I thought the children at the "top" private schools were...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a good thing for independent schools to have some kind of range -- as someone said, from a little above average to really spectacular. Even if you have a spectacular kid, don't you want them to have some idea of how they fit into the curve? Do you want them to think they they are failures just because their board scores fall slightly short of 2400?

Totally agree! I want my child to go to school in a more mixed academic environment. That is what life is. My fear of private was that there would be too many top 3% kids and if you were suddenly in the 90% you would think you were a failure. Which is crazy, and seems to happen around here. Perspective is key. These kids are bright, and very lucky to be getting the education they are getting. Let's keep them ethical, motivated, secure, happy, and giving of their talents to the greater good. That's what I would like to see us all "measuring" when we decide whether it was all worth it.

The last two posters are TOO sane for this thread. Thanks for these perspectives. I was dismissed earlier because I was "insecure" for writing something similar - reassuring to know that I am not the only one who is "insecure" or more focused on raising a kid who is, to paraphrase PP, a happy, motivated, and compassionate.

[Anonymous]

Some schools with montessori designation really do NOT encourage reading
My child switched from one school where she was reading, to another where only 'polishing' seemed to be taught
she was frustrated, and we only stayed a year...
All her schoolmates who started K reading chapter books are still with her now, in 6th grade, and aren't academic superstars....

[Anonymous]

There are REAL Montessori School and one faking it. Even they don't have AMI cert --they're not real. Perhaps the school your girl switched to was just a "wannabe".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some schools with montessori designation really do NOT encourage reading
My child switched from one school where she was reading, to another where only 'polishing' seemed to be taught
she was frustrated, and we only stayed a year...
All her schoolmates who started K reading chapter books are still with her now, in 6th grade, and aren't academic superstars....

See, early reading not necessarily a predictor of academic superstars.

[Anonymous]

The Smithsonian's early enrichment center used to have a philosophy that reading in K wasn't necessary. Note -- they weren't saying it's *bad* for kids to teach themselves to read, in fact it's all good. But for both readers and non-readers, it's important to tour the museums to look at the Calder sculptures or whatever, and use their bodies on the gym, because all of these things contribute to other kids of intelligences later on. For example, the Smithsonian used to cite a study that linked playtime when very young to higher math skills later on, specifically, using your body at recess contributes to spatial skills when you reach geometry.

Naturally, some parents complained when their kids hit 1st grade and were behind in reading. So the Smithsonian changed its policy the year after DC #1 graduated. It's not that these Smithsonian kids were dumb -- DC#1 reached the top of 3 reading groups by January of 1st grade and was a 99th percentiler when tested in K (and see my next para about the validity of these scores for K). Just that they hadn't been taught to read and didn' teach themselves for whatever reasons. Which may well be the case for non-reading kids in OP's school who nevertheless may still be in the 99th percentile.

I also agree that testing 3-5-year olds is as much a function of the home environment as anything else (parental vocabulary, reading at night, even whether you can sit still for the test). It all shakes out by about 3rd grade, when these tests become more reliable.

So I agree with the posters who have said that the real question is what your kid does while the others are being taught to read. Some individualized reading instruction seems appropriate, but don't knock the free play time either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are REAL Montessori School and one faking it. Even they don't have AMI cert --they're not real. Perhaps the school your girl switched to was just a "wannabe".

Looney Tunes - REAL Montessori schools do NOT insist that every child needs to be reading by age 3.5. It's hogwash. BS. Find me the supporting documentation for your outrageous claim, please. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

You the one with the serious self-esteem problems pp if you need to insult and name-call in order to make a point. You obviously didn't go to Montessori. I would guess public school in the south...no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You the one with the serious self-esteem problems pp if you need to insult and name-call in order to make a point. You obviously didn't go to Montessori. I would guess public school in the south...no?

Wrong - private school in DC. But I fail to see how you misrepresenting Montessori has anything to do with that. And there is nothing wrong with my self-esteem. Luckily, I also have a highly-attuned bs detector, which seems to annoy you.

I greatly respect the Montessori philosophy and find it truly bizarre that someone would purport that is is something it is not. It provides a terrific education without having to teach all toddlers to read. You have made a blanket statement that all children in Montessori schools learn to read between the ages of 2.5 and 3.5. I have asked that you support that crazy assertion with documentation. You have nothing, so you attempt to insult my education and provenance (although I personally have no problem with either public schools or the South).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You the one with the serious self-esteem problems pp if you need to insult and name-call in order to make a point. You obviously didn't go to Montessori. I would guess public school in the south...no?

And so appropriately placed on the Private/Independent Schools forum . . .

[Anonymous]

maybe someone should start a separate Montessori school forum for those interested.

[Anonymous]

Or at least a separate thread.

[Anonymous]

There seems to be a recurring need for a thread which tells its readers they shouldn't be on the thread bc they either went to public school, or have a child in public school. (Of course, whether or not that assertion is true matters not.)

[Anonymous]

The OP seems to insult private school kids. I doubt her kid is in a private school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There seems to be a recurring need for a thread which tells its readers they shouldn't be on the thread bc they either went to public school, or have a child in public school. (Of course, whether or not that assertion is true matters not.)

You go girl. We don't want their kind on our thread!!!!

What about those of us who have kids in both public and private? Do we need a third type of thread, for "mixed" families? Or from your statement, it would seem that being a public school grad yourself is grounds for banishment. So do the moms who went to public with the kids who are in private need a fourth type of thread???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The OP seems to insult private school kids. I doubt her kid is in a private school

Why? Because she doesn't swallow the kool-aid that all private school kids are geniuses? (Note that I don't think the private schools themselves are peddling this kool-aid, but posters like the one I've quoted above generally seem to buy it.)