Anonymous wrote:^ honestly it sounds like homeschooling would be perfect for you. You are very particular about her education and want it done a certain way, and with your background you could make it happen (not meant in a bad way, quite the opposite).
There are a ton of homeschool groups (see the whole forum dedicated to it) that do outings and groups for socialization at any level she is ready for, totally up to you.

This sounds like the best solution for you OP. Nothing that is available in public school will appeal to you - it doesn't matter if it is Reggio, Montessori, or play-based as the majority of DCPS/DCPCS are. I don't think you will even find what you want in most privates to be honest. You sound insufferable and you are encouraging your child to become even more of a snowflake than you've already made her. I'm being harsh with you because I truly think you have no conception of how much your self-centered thinking affects others when you try to have every luxury you want at no sacrifice to yourself. Have you offered to collect cans or do other piece-meal work to add to the coffers, even after hearing what other PPs and their parents did?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im subsidizing white middle class kids whose parents are incapable of feeling embarrassed to go to private school. At $2.5 HHI, its insignificant for me, other than the fact that my kids have to go to school with the kids of these terrible people.

Would it make you feel better if I told you we were a URM?

If you are the $225k family who gets 60% aid, then it makes me uncomfortable. Affirmative action is meant to give kids a chance who otherwise wouldn't be able to. What they are doing here is paying a wealthy family to send their (AA? Hispanic?) child to the school just to improve diversity stats.

Here's my advice, send your kids to public until they are ready for middle school or high school, and then apply to a big 3 and see what aid you are offered. At this age the decisions made by private school boil down to how much they want your kid. It has very little do do to with parents. If your child is very high achieving, interesting, empathetic, interviews well and has special talents to contribute to the community you will get a significant FA offer, If not, your child may not get admitted or may get admitted but with little or no aid. This thread seems to be about ethics and whether certain groups of people deserve private school if the cannot pay the full tuition. In reality, the emphasis should be on the student. The top schools want kids who will get into the top twenty universities and be leaders or provide special talents to the school, eg sports, music, leadership, etc. They need these kids to keep up with the competition. This may not be very pleasant, because there are plenty of bright, good kids, who get turned away. But private schools are selective when it comes to aid at the upper entry years. Parental status, etc. is much less important to them than who your kids is and what he/she offers the school. This approach worked for us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im subsidizing white middle class kids whose parents are incapable of feeling embarrassed to go to private school. At $2.5 HHI, its insignificant for me, other than the fact that my kids have to go to school with the kids of these terrible people.

Why should they be embarrassed? All of these seeming inequities are inherent in any system with financial aid.

Here's an idea: How about lowering the sticker price and not having any financial aid at all--with maybe a very few exceptions for, say, a child already in the school who has a parent die and come down with a very expensive medical condition.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all! That way if the kid's family befell some financial hardship they wouldn't have to leave school.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all AND of the same quality for all. This notion that people who don't make 2.5m a year she be fine with their kid getting an OK/mediocre education is nonsense. Let's not be delusional here, the better "free" schools are in the expensive neighborhoods. Guess what that means? They aren't so free -- high ass taxes! NOT free, and certainly NOT available to all!

Yes, it would be great if school quality were more equal, but the poster with the $225K HHI could certainly afford to live in a small house/townhouse/condo in Bethesda or McLean and send their kids to a very very good public school. Not an "OK/mediocre" education, but a great education.

not if you want three bedrooms. We looked for two years and then lucked into a charter and thus a three bedroom in a bad school district. Good school districts would have meant a two bedroom. 180 HHI.

If only rich people were able to go to private school. They aren't really worried about other leaching, they are really worried about having to rub elbows with the less desirable.

What a joke. Such aholes!

Op, all of your concerns are valid and please don't let these a holes on here dissaude you. Please do apply to private and apply for aid. You sound like a reasonable person and you are really in tune with what your kid needs to thrive. Maybe private won't be necessary for all 12 years but certainly do try to apply for aid and admission beginning in kindergarten. you may not have much money to offer the school but all schools need parents that can volunteer and that is an excellent contribution. We would love to have more individuals like you at our school. Best of luck to you.

Plus then you wouldn't have to leach off other people, OP

^ honestly it sounds like homeschooling would be perfect for you. You are very particular about her education and want it done a certain way, and with your background you could make it happen (not meant in a bad way, quite the opposite).
There are a ton of homeschool groups (see the whole forum dedicated to it) that do outings and groups for socialization at any level she is ready for, totally up to you.

Anonymous wrote:OP,
Part of doing "what's best for your family" and staying home with them should have included not being able to pay for private school.
I'm sure you did a cost/benefit analysis, looked at housing choices, retirement accounts, college savings, vacation and extra curricular costs, etc and made it work to stay home, per your own account.
I'm wondering why it never occured to you that part of that choice was public schools?
I'm genuinely asking, you seem like you made a thoughtful decision, but that needed to include schooling.

OP here. We did make a thoughtful decision for me staying at home based on a multitude of different considerations. Several years before having kids, we purchased a house in what's considered a "good" public school district (though not the "top tier" of local public school districts). We assumed our kids would go to public school in part because the schools were known for being relatively good and in part for financial considerations, and in part because I went to public school myself and had a very good experience.

Since then, a number of things have happened. One is that I've realized my small-town experience where everyone went to public school because that was the only real option and we lived in a state with really good public schools is very different than the situation around here. I have also heard some bad things about the public schools that have me thinking they may not be a good fit.

As my oldest has gotten old enough for preschools, I've started paying more attention to schools. Perhaps in part because of my own background in education, I've been very interested what and how students are learning. My DD and I did a mommy-and-me class at a local preschool that had a lot of tenants I really, really liked but was expensive and also had some ideological components that I did not agree with. I chose a cheaper coop preschool when she started preschool (age 2) because I was a SAHM and wanted to be involved in her education and because it was less expensive. But I saw a lot of the classroom as a result of being in a coop and was not impressed with what I saw. It was "okay," but there were several things that were not what I was hoping for. I did more research and found a school I really felt was about as "perfect" as we could get for what we wanted, although expensive, and my DD has gone there for the past year. It was a financial scrape to send her there, but I have seen over the past year just how much she's thrived in this environment that's just right for her, and I've also seen that this expense can be (though isn't always) worth it. This has made me think more about whether I should seek out a different alternative for her when she goes to kindergarten.

Beyond that, frankly, my DD does not have the most "go with the flow" personality. She's a great kid but not someone who I feel will automatically thrive in any environment. She's very shy, does best in fairly calm and structured environments and with a high teacher-to-child ratio (not because she misbehaves but in part because she's shy), and although shy is pretty stubborn and has a TON of energy that I worry may bubble over into misbehavior if she's in a rote-learning environment where she isn't given a lot of opportunity for self exploration and outdoor time. I don't think all the private schools would be good for her either, but I do think that it's something worth exploring, as some of the ones I've researched seem to provide some of the things I think would be good for her -- at least in the primary grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's another good idea: how about we have a system where everyone pays their own way- a parasite-free system. I draw no distinction between the single mom with 6 kids with 5 different men who wants me to pay for her kids and the white family with $225 HHI who want me to pay for their kids to go to private school. Both made awful decisions that led them to a life of poverty and expect others to bail them out.

I went to private. One of the downsides was being around kids like yours.

Do your parents ever ask you for their $ back ?

The single mom must mean Black or Brown in the scenario since 225k income earner means White.

Anonymous wrote:Here's another good idea: how about we have a system where everyone pays their own way- a parasite-free system. I draw no distinction between the single mom with 6 kids with 5 different men who wants me to pay for her kids and the white family with $225 HHI who want me to pay for their kids to go to private school. Both made awful decisions that led them to a life of poverty and expect others to bail them out.

I went to private. One of the downsides was being around kids like yours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im subsidizing white middle class kids whose parents are incapable of feeling embarrassed to go to private school. At $2.5 HHI, its insignificant for me, other than the fact that my kids have to go to school with the kids of these terrible people.

Why should they be embarrassed? All of these seeming inequities are inherent in any system with financial aid.

Here's an idea: How about lowering the sticker price and not having any financial aid at all--with maybe a very few exceptions for, say, a child already in the school who has a parent die and come down with a very expensive medical condition.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all! That way if the kid's family befell some financial hardship they wouldn't have to leave school.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all AND of the same quality for all. This notion that people who don't make 2.5m a year she be fine with their kid getting an OK/mediocre education is nonsense. Let's not be delusional here, the better "free" schools are in the expensive neighborhoods. Guess what that means? They aren't so free -- high ass taxes! NOT free, and certainly NOT available to all!

Yes, it would be great if school quality were more equal, but the poster with the $225K HHI could certainly afford to live in a small house/townhouse/condo in Bethesda or McLean and send their kids to a very very good public school. Not an "OK/mediocre" education, but a great education.

Here's another good idea: how about we have a system where everyone pays their own way- a parasite-free system. I draw no distinction between the single mom with 6 kids with 5 different men who wants me to pay for her kids and the white family with $225 HHI who want me to pay for their kids to go to private school. Both made awful decisions that led them to a life of poverty and expect others to bail them out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im subsidizing white middle class kids whose parents are incapable of feeling embarrassed to go to private school. At $2.5 HHI, its insignificant for me, other than the fact that my kids have to go to school with the kids of these terrible people.

Why should they be embarrassed? All of these seeming inequities are inherent in any system with financial aid.

Here's an idea: How about lowering the sticker price and not having any financial aid at all--with maybe a very few exceptions for, say, a child already in the school who has a parent die and come down with a very expensive medical condition.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all! That way if the kid's family befell some financial hardship they wouldn't have to leave school.

If only we had a option in this country for k-12 education that was free to all AND of the same quality for all. This notion that people who don't make 2.5m a year she be fine with their kid getting an OK/mediocre education is nonsense. Let's not be delusional here, the better "free" schools are in the expensive neighborhoods. Guess what that means? They aren't so free -- high ass taxes! NOT free, and certainly NOT available to all!