When parents are only applying to Maret, GDS and Sidwell...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to a “top 2” school in a city with two such schools and I’m really confused by what “social climbing” is supposed to mean here. The social life is a bunch of frumpy moms and dad-bod dads with *mostly* similar incomes/wealth to us. It’s not like I’m getting an invitation to yacht with MacKenzie Bezos out of this. Maybe in NYC or LA this would lead to a better/cooler social life but not so much in a city like DC or the city where I am.

Dear, you're not really part of this discussion

NP. Why? Too close to the truth? Not everyone is foaming at the mouth to have a Senator’s grandchild or a second tier hedge fund manager’s progeny in their class. It’s not like LA where my friend had Kerry Washington’s kid in her kid’s class.

I’m PP and yeah, basically this. I guess I could sorta get it if we are only talking about Sidwell AND the Obamas were still there but otherwise who is really social climbing from DC schools??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could this seriously be an educational decision for elementary school or is it just pure social climbing strategy?

Maybe more like lack of imagination/ intellectual laziness Coupled with rigid ideas of what high quality education looks like.

There are so many good options in this area and there is no guarantee that all bright, wealthy (or poorer) students will be happy or thrive at schools with the highest snob value.

Are you an Asst AD at a lower tier private under pressure for her job or what ?

Nope just a parent with imagination and a bright, creative non- preppy kid …

[Anonymous]

Covid honestly has changed everything. I'm not in admissions but I work in an independent K-8 that typically struggles to fill every seat, but those days are (at least temporarily) over. We had far more applicants than we could admit, and it was actually hard to say no to families, but there are fire codes and rules we have to adhere to. We are not the kind of school that is trying to be Sidwell, but it's a wonderful school, and I suspect that this year we are taking a number of kids who in a "normal" year - when parents had more confidence in the local public schools - would get into and enroll at Sidwell. I think Sidwell is terrific too; it's great that there are a range of schools in the District. Anyway, if you're set on an independent school, definitely include a safety, because everything has been turned on its head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

If they are all so smart and well prepared - why do so many Sidwell kids end up at mediocre colleges? Yes, understand Harvard isn't going to take all of them but there are a lot each year going to schools ranked outside top 100 or top 200. Don't tell me it's "fit"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe a troll - but I'd pay for other two but would not pay for Maret. Value just isn't there - YMMV.

GDS is unarguably now clear #2 in area (<10% admit) followed by STA/NCS safe at #3.

Sidwell "7%" admit rate is massive overestimate. Take away admissions for children of alumni and politicians, siblings and quakers and it is probably more like a 1% chance for well-qualified but "unhooked" applicants if that.

What I take from this is that these schools don’t take the most qualified, highest caliber students. They take good students from wealthy or connected families. Low admissions rates are indicative of demand, and the name brands have more of it. It’s driven by their proximity to lots of affluent families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

So, UPenn, Swarthmore, Haverford and the scores of Quaker elementary and high schools up and down the east coast are, what, exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sidwell is Quaker. Most quaker schools are expensive. However, Sidwell puts less emphasis on Quaker values than most Quaker schools. You don't get a whole lot of Quaker simplicity there. You still hear about Quaker values from time to time and kids do go to Quaker meetings from time to time.

"Time to time" is starting every day with silence, and many individual classes with silence, and a weekly meeting for worship?

Quakerism is also woven into several of the high school classes as well as core to the curriculum in Lower School and parts of middle school.

Do you have any affiliation with the school, or is this just a blind comment on an anonymous message board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

Nah. Sidwell tuition is squarely in line with the tuition of other K-12 Quaker schools that are located *within the city limits* of large East Coast cities. Particularly NYC, Philly, Providence and Baltimore. Baltimore Friends is somewhat less, but of course so are Baltimore homes, salaries, everything. Same for Wilmington Friends, in a city that I just learned from the interwebs is 51% less expensive of a city to live in than Washington DC

I hope you're not thinking of the practically rural SSFS as your point of comparison?

Exactly right. None of these supposedly Quaker schools are actually Quaker. They like to tout their values but their price tags tell the true story. No true Quaker would believe that over $50k/year is in line with the Quaker values of simplicity and care for the Earth. It’s marketing and it works.

So you are saying that the Quakers who send their kids to Quaker schools are not true Quakers? Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

This is every high school in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

If they are all so smart and well prepared - why do so many Sidwell kids end up at mediocre colleges? Yes, understand Harvard isn't going to take all of them but there are a lot each year going to schools ranked outside top 100 or top 200. Don't tell me it's "fit"

There’s only so many slots at elite colleges. Sidwell, particularly at the younger years is more about parental connections and wealth than aptitude. How are you going to accurately judge the aptitude of a kid who enters at age 4? If your child is mediocre going into Sidwell, they may get a very good education but even that isn’t going to change the fundamental mediocre characteristics of the kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

If they are all so smart and well prepared - why do so many Sidwell kids end up at mediocre colleges? Yes, understand Harvard isn't going to take all of them but there are a lot each year going to schools ranked outside top 100 or top 200. Don't tell me it's "fit"

What is your definition of mediocre?

Often times it comes down to merit or financial aid - who is giving the most for a student to attend. Remember, not everyone at Sidwell is a trust fund wealthy baby. Also, I know of people who went to a specific school because of a specific program, and said school may not be a household name.

Also, many feel, after 4 or more years at a school like Sidwell, that they have had a SLAC type experience and want something different for college. To each their own, but I would be curious what PP believe is a mediocre school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If they are all so smart and well prepared - why do so many Sidwell kids end up at mediocre colleges? Yes, understand Harvard isn't going to take all of them but there are a lot each year going to schools ranked outside top 100 or top 200. Don't tell me it's "fit"

I just looked at the 2020 list and didn't see any school outside of the "top 100," whatever that means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

I'm not Quaker but have experience with both Sidwell Friends and Sandy Spring Friends. Quaker values are a far more significant part of student life at Sandy Spring, but I wasn't annoyed by it at all. It seemed very genuine. At Sidwell it didn't always seem sincere because of the social and academic competition that affects so many things there.

On the other hand, there's no denying that Sidwell students get a great college preparatory education surrounded by many bright students. There are some excellent students at Sandy Spring, but I'd estimate that a quarter to a third of Sandy Spring students couldn't handle the intense Sidwell workload. There are a lot of very smart kids at Sidwell and very few weak students there.

If they are all so smart and well prepared - why do so many Sidwell kids end up at mediocre colleges? Yes, understand Harvard isn't going to take all of them but there are a lot each year going to schools ranked outside top 100 or top 200. Don't tell me it's "fit"

There’s only so many slots at elite colleges. Sidwell, particularly at the younger years is more about parental connections and wealth than aptitude. How are you going to accurately judge the aptitude of a kid who enters at age 4? If your child is mediocre going into Sidwell, they may get a very good education but even that isn’t going to change the fundamental mediocre characteristics of the kid.

This is one of the dumbest posts I’ve read on DCUM, which has an exceptionally low bar for stupidity. Intellect is not fixed, it is elastic. Take an average IQ kid and given them a good education and they are not mediocre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

Nah. Sidwell tuition is squarely in line with the tuition of other K-12 Quaker schools that are located *within the city limits* of large East Coast cities. Particularly NYC, Philly, Providence and Baltimore. Baltimore Friends is somewhat less, but of course so are Baltimore homes, salaries, everything. Same for Wilmington Friends, in a city that I just learned from the interwebs is 51% less expensive of a city to live in than Washington DC

I hope you're not thinking of the practically rural SSFS as your point of comparison?

Exactly right. None of these supposedly Quaker schools are actually Quaker. They like to tout their values but their price tags tell the true story. No true Quaker would believe that over $50k/year is in line with the Quaker values of simplicity and care for the Earth. It’s marketing and it works.

So you are saying that the Quakers who send their kids to Quaker schools are not true Quakers? Got it.

I’m not PP but the point seems to be that these ultra expensive private schools are a contradiction to their stated missions. Catering almost exclusively to the top 0.01% or the politically connected is not exactly “equality and community”. So while they may be Quaker in name, if they don’t actually practice Quaker ideals, they are just trading on the legacy of Ben Franklin and the other early Quakers without doing the hard work of educating the community. GDS suffers the same disconnect between its existence and its purpose.