Another piece on entitled parents in independent schools and Sidwell by The Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Keeping something up about how parents act with respect to admissions is much more central to the board. Other stories, like the alleged rape at Sidwell, were taken down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a couple of different elements going on. The writer seems to have an issue with Catholics and Jews-make no mistake that what she said was veiled racism. Make a subtle jab that schools like Gonzaga or Charles Smith are somehow less than make zero sense and is not based on any fact. You can’t because schools of faith have all sorts of different rebricd in terms of weaving in the ethical education with the actual execution of curriculum. It is all very personal to what a given parent values. She also mixes a real issue which is a parent calling a school to somehow hurt someone’s college chance by bringing up negative information and let’s face it it could be very biased with half of a story. Calling from blocked phones to boot now this is crazy and I am going to guess that population is so small in crazy that it is not worth discussing. The other issue which is real is outplacement people lying to parents and lying so much they (parents)feel they need to document by taping meeting. Sounds bad but if it is legal in DC (not sure if it is a one party must be aware area) then it forces honestly. I also think when you send your kid to private you are paying for a better education and a better education should result in a good placement. Now we are not talking about a poor student but a good student then yes I would think they would have more college choice the. Going to Whitman. A fine school but not Sidwell. I have no kid at Sidwell but can we agree it is a great school. I do think if it starts to turn out that you receive no benefit to college from a school like Sidwell then makes no sense to spend the money unless you are so wealthy you just want a fancy lunch. So the article just makes no sense.

Holy crap! I cannot believe that sentence made it past the editors. If a TV anchor said that on air, they'd be fired.

She said that the Catholic schools and Jewish day schools are “second rate,” not that Catholics and Jews are. Look at the million threads on this site on the “Big 3,” “Big 5,” top private schools in the area. None are Catholic or Jewish. But if you read the article she actually thinks that schools that teach religion are the only privates with a real mission, that the parents at the others essentially only have one mission, the pursuit of a top college for their kid.

No there is definite prejudice against Catholic and Jewish school and the religious who send their kids there.
Saying “second rate”-what is the basis for second rate? I see this a lot and somehow this sort of nonsense is okay to say. It is not. Charlies Smith is an excellent school as are the many Catholic Independent
Schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a couple of different elements going on. The writer seems to have an issue with Catholics and Jews-make no mistake that what she said was veiled racism. Make a subtle jab that schools like Gonzaga or Charles Smith are somehow less than make zero sense and is not based on any fact. You can’t because schools of faith have all sorts of different rebricd in terms of weaving in the ethical education with the actual execution of curriculum. It is all very personal to what a given parent values. She also mixes a real issue which is a parent calling a school to somehow hurt someone’s college chance by bringing up negative information and let’s face it it could be very biased with half of a story. Calling from blocked phones to boot now this is crazy and I am going to guess that population is so small in crazy that it is not worth discussing. The other issue which is real is outplacement people lying to parents and lying so much they (parents)feel they need to document by taping meeting. Sounds bad but if it is legal in DC (not sure if it is a one party must be aware area) then it forces honestly. I also think when you send your kid to private you are paying for a better education and a better education should result in a good placement. Now we are not talking about a poor student but a good student then yes I would think they would have more college choice the. Going to Whitman. A fine school but not Sidwell. I have no kid at Sidwell but can we agree it is a great school. I do think if it starts to turn out that you receive no benefit to college from a school like Sidwell then makes no sense to spend the money unless you are so wealthy you just want a fancy lunch. So the article just makes no sense.

Holy crap! I cannot believe that sentence made it past the editors. If a TV anchor said that on air, they'd be fired.

She said that the Catholic schools and Jewish day schools are “second rate,” not that Catholics and Jews are. Look at the million threads on this site on the “Big 3,” “Big 5,” top private schools in the area. None are Catholic or Jewish. But if you read the article she actually thinks that schools that teach religion are the only privates with a real mission, that the parents at the others essentially only have one mission, the pursuit of a top college for their kid.

No there is definite prejudice against Catholic and Jewish school and the religious who send their kids there.
Saying “second rate”-what is the basis for second rate? I see this a lot and somehow this sort of nonsense is okay to say. It is not. Charlies Smith is an excellent school as are the many Catholic Independent
Schools.

dp: Suppose the basis for rating is proportion of National Merit Semi-Finalists. Is the statement fair by that measure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this and virtually every thread on related topics neglects to address is the gross negligence of some (admittedly not all) of the Washington elite school’s board of trustees and senior administration in perpetuating toxic cultures. Frequently the focus is on the “small but loud minority” of entitled, privileged, misbehaving families. This all results from a culture perpetuated by leadership, who consistently invite toxicity into their communities in the form of excessively influential, privileged, entitled families.

Sure, I’m a “disgruntled parent of a waitlisted child,” who watched her well profiled children be politely but effectively rejected while noticing a years long pattern of lesser profiled children in our community from significantly more affluent families being accepted to the likes of Sidwell, GDS, and Maret. “Disgruntled?” Yes - but grateful as we ended up in a much less toxic and better balanced independent school environment where students and families thrive. A community we later learned is chosen by equally affluent families as the elites, but unlike at the elites who seem better grounded in core values and who put the needs of others ahead of their own. A community we might never have known had our children been accepted at an “elite,” as we too would have blindly said yes to an acceptance.

The fact that these threads generate such vast participation without addressing the core problem of negligent leadership is a sign of the culture of exceptionalism perpetuated by some of the more prominent, selective Washington schools.

I completely empathize with this experience as it was ours as well. Three children, first two both WL at what are considered top schools on DCUM when less accomplished children from much more affluent and connected classmates received multiple acceptances. Disappointed at first, our two oldest ended up at an alternate private with such positive experience that our third didn’t even look at the others.

We understand the pros and cons of access to influence among the different school communities and after a little initial resistance we have given up what we’re ultimately misperceptions of exceptionalism of the elites. All of those entitled folks can have one another. We’re sticking with authentic values & service driven education for our children and no longer looking back...

Sounds like you’re still looking back.

I think this article is hilarious and so is this thread.

I send my kids to public school and guess what, not only are admissions fair, my kids get a good education and have classmates from a variety of backgrounds.

Congrats, it’s always nice to hear when folks have a positive experience. However, if your kids went to public school, why are you on this thread or in this forum? I often see folks posting about how great their children’s public school experience was - on the private school forum. I can’t help but wonder about the motivation of such posts - so strange...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Keeping something up about how parents act with respect to admissions is much more central to the board. Other stories, like the alleged rape at Sidwell, were taken down.

Because there wasn't a rape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most shocking thing in this thread is the suggestion that the SFS administration has pressured teachers to change grades for children of prominent parents -- obviously to the disadvantage of the rest of the students. If this is true, it is a scandal.

+1000. This is the same as cheating on the SAT in the Rick Singer college admissions scandal. Sidwell is basically selling higher grades to those who can pay. Given the connection of Rick Singer to Sidwell, it now makes me wonder whether some of the college admissions in Sidwell are also suspect. Sidwell college admissions should be investigated by the Feds.

Sidwell hired Singer to testify in the case. He has no other connection to the school.

[Anonymous]

Sidwell is the best school in the area. All the haters on DCUM are just pissed because they were either waitlisted and rejected by
the school. I believe about less than 4% of applicants are accepted. Congrats to all who made it in and those who couldn’t make it in are just sour grapes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of entitled parents, why does the mod keep deleting threads about predatory teachers at the Cathedral schools? Would he do that if it was about Bullis?

+100

I thought he same thing. Two times people have posted about the predatory teachers in the cathedral schools which is a huge story
Deleted twice. But five threads about Sidwell and the one set of parents who behaved terribly with regards to collage admissions and it’s literally hundreds of posts. What it reveals is much more about the moderator, the community of DCUM who are all up in arms about Sidwell and their perceived enititlements all from the outside, who are themselves more obsessed with college than with child abuse. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

The moderator is clearly motivated to protect certain schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell is the best school in the area. All the haters on DCUM are just pissed because they were either waitlisted and rejected by
the school. I believe about less than 4% of applicants are accepted. Congrats to all who made it in and those who couldn’t make it in are just sour grapes.

It’s hard to know if this post is motivated with troll aspiration or genuine intention. Either way, so sad...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Keeping something up about how parents act with respect to admissions is much more central to the board. Other stories, like the alleged rape at Sidwell, were taken down.

Because there wasn't a rape.

Well if you say so. Point is things get taken down about all schools.
Even if true. Like the Maret pot brownies

[Anonymous]

What does your pathetic frame of reference have to do with anything?

[Anonymous]

CES is in Rockville.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell is the best school in the area. All the haters on DCUM are just pissed because they were either waitlisted and rejected by
the school. I believe about less than 4% of applicants are accepted. Congrats to all who made it in and those who couldn’t make it in are just sour grapes.

You know almost no one even applies to Sidwell, right? Four percent of what? 200 kids? The applicant pools to these private schools are pathetically small. They are hardly drawing from the best and the brightest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell is the best school in the area. All the haters on DCUM are just pissed because they were either waitlisted and rejected by
the school. I believe about less than 4% of applicants are accepted. Congrats to all who made it in and those who couldn’t make it in are just sour grapes.

It is a good school, particularly for those who have not shot at the Cathedral schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell is the best school in the area. All the haters on DCUM are just pissed because they were either waitlisted and rejected by
the school. I believe about less than 4% of applicants are accepted. Congrats to all who made it in and those who couldn’t make it in are just sour grapes.

It is a good school, particularly for those who have not shot at the Cathedral schools.

What a ludicrous statement. They pull from totally different audiences. Sidwell’s moderately progressive curriculum results in a liberal appeal and the cathedral schools traditional, rigid approach pulls from a more conservative base. Any overlap results from chasing the elite monicker with perceptions of influence and access, nothing else.