The school has become a factory where "students" are used to build up the name and credibility of the institution. These kids will likely not qualify in the NCAA clearinghouse and will not have the kind of future other potential college athletes will have.

It is sad for the school and more sad for the kids.

People spent 50+ DCUM pages talking about the weak athletics department at Sidwell. I would take that over this 10 days out of ten.

Bullis has always been the laughingstock of the IAC schools and has always been looked upon as the safety school - its a fact. Its college placement is GOOD but not excellent for a school where you dish out over $30,000+ a year.

The new headmaster has put a huge emphasis on building the community - well how do you do that - build an athletic program! As a long time follower of the IAC, it seems like Bullis is recruiting heavily for football and basketball. Clearly the old headmaster (now at Sidwell) had no desire to build Bullis' athletics. Just last year, Bullis' basketball team was comprised of several transfer players as well as their football team. Just look at who their best football player was this year and their top basketball players - all transfer students. I kinda feel bad for the students and parents who have been there since the middle school working so hard to compete on the varsity and all of a sudden a new recruited transfer student shows up. Just last year, Bullis had a transfer student from Canada show up at its doors for the basketball season and suddenly transferred out this past summer. Bottom li

The school itself has very nice campus and some very nice academic buildings. I'm not sure what the school really stands as it tends to go in cycles every 5 -6 years when a new headmaster comes in. It has a state of the art Arts Center as well.

Its safe to say its academics are towards the low end when comparing it to the other IAC schools.

Here's a partial list of where the Bullis class of 2011 went (what I can remember off the top of my head): UMD (several), UVA, Wake Forest (more than one), St. Andrews, Middlebury, Columbia, Wellesley, Sarah Lawrence,Colby, GW, Holy Cross, Franklin and Marshall, Pepperdine, U. Michigan (several), USC, Miami University, University of Miami, University of Chicago, Georgetown (several), University of Pennsylvania (more than one), Clemson, American, Ursinus, Dickinson, Babson, Boston University (more than one), Northeastern, Davidson, Penn State (more than one), Carnegie Mellon, Warren Wilson, University of Mississippi, Ithaca, Johns Hopkins, Tulane, University of Alabama, University of Massachusetts, UMBC. Students also got into, but elected not to attend Washington University of St. Louis, Amherst, William and Mary (more than one), Boston College and Brown.

What I've heard about the class of 2012 EA/ED so far includes: Dartmouth, Brown, Wash U (more than one), Princeton and Haverford.

Anonymous wrote:What types of colleges do Bullis grads move on to? Our Dc's are young still, but Bullis could be an option for one. He's very smart and excels in one sport, so I think the environment might be right (as long as the academics are really there). Thanks in advance.

The college placement is okay, not great. On the other hand, the cohort is less strong in terms of test scores, at least as measured by National Merit Scholarship Semifinalists--Bullis rarely has more than 1 or so per year--than some of the other schools (like the DC independents). So I don't think they are under-achieving in terms of college placement. On the other hand, if your son ends up as a top athlete, he may get a boost there.

On the educational environment front, good teachers at Bullis, from what I've heard.

We went to tour the school and was very turned off by the tour. The Lower School Ad was able to tell us about the buildings and athletic program but knew very little about what happens in the classroom!! Very disappointing!!!

What types of colleges do Bullis grads move on to? Our Dc's are young still, but Bullis could be an option for one. He's very smart and excels in one sport, so I think the environment might be right (as long as the academics are really there). Thanks in advance.

SSAT bothers me, if you want to have your child's grades mean anything to colleges. Bullis is turning into "that" school that will use athletes and not take a vested interest in the life after school.

Look at the story in today's Washington Post a bout the DaMatha alum who is playing basketball at UDC.

Anonymous wrote:Per Bullis athletic insiders, Boorman has waived the SSAT for athletic candidates carrying a B+ or better average. Sounds okay unless you realize that there are, sadly, school systems where attendance and good behavior get you a B+, no questions asked. Also got a tip on an athlete with affluent parents who has been given "financial aid" (really a disguised athletic scholarship).

The waived SSAT's don't bother me. However, the athlete with affluent parents on aid is disgusting.

Per Bullis athletic insiders, Boorman has waived the SSAT for athletic candidates carrying a B+ or better average. Sounds okay unless you realize that there are, sadly, school systems where attendance and good behavior get you a B+, no questions asked. Also got a tip on an athlete with affluent parents who has been given "financial aid" (really a disguised athletic scholarship).

I'd love to hear earlier posters (both pro and con) elaborate a bit; specifically:

To the PP who said "I like the old head better": What did Farquhar do better? How has the school changed since Boorman came in? If you feel the heightened emphasis on athletics is harming Bullis, could you be specific about how you see that happening?

To the PP who likes Boorman: How have relationships within the school community become stronger? What do you mean when you say academics have become more integrated? If school spirt has improved, to what do you attribute that? What do Bullis parents and students feel more enthusiastic about since Boorman came in?

I really can't speak to athlete's academic performance since I am a parent of a high schooler, though many athletes in this year's senior class, along with those from the Class of 2011 were admitted to very good schools based more on academics than athletic skills. He has introduced coaches who are not teachers to work alongside teacher coaches which has strengthened the team experience on many levels.

Anonymous wrote:He's put his emphasis on building a stronger community, with stronger relationships resulting across the school. In two years he has fostered greater school pride, more integrated academics, and yes - he has put a greater emphasis on supporting sports teams so that coaches have stronger coach/mentor skills than in the previous years.

He has been a welcome addition to Bullis.

Do you concede admissions has lowered the bar for admitting athletes?

He's put his emphasis on building a stronger community, with stronger relationships resulting across the school. In two years he has fostered greater school pride, more integrated academics, and yes - he has put a greater emphasis on supporting sports teams so that coaches have stronger coach/mentor skills than in the previous years.

He has been a welcome addition to Bullis.

Liked the old head better.

Now that he's in his second year, what do people think about the current Head of School at Bullis? It is clear that he is putting a tremendous emphasis on athletics -- is this what the parents/board/community wants? Are there any concerns about Bullis' academic reputation suffering as they go all in on athletics in a big way?