This whole sports conversation helps show why so many familes prefer Langley to Potomac. When you looking for a school for someone younger than, say 10, do you really want to be thinking about whether they can get into college or how competitive they are for high school sports? I'd rather look at a school that's going to have music and storytime and language and plays and soccer for my child while she is still a child.

Sorry, mean to say "old scores" in my PP. Not "old schools". As most of you know, the scoring basis for SATs was different in previous years.

Anonymous wrote:The PP expressed concern that Potomac wouldn't grant "concessions" for "excellent athletes." Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought he/she meant that the school wouldn't lower its admission standards or wouldn't cut students any academic slack to recruit/retain such students. That WOULD be lowering academic standards, wouldn't it? If a student truly meets admission standards but asks to be excused from some academic requirements because of outside sports commitments (such as tournament travel). that wouldn't bother me, because it doesn't affect other kids. What bothers me is when a private school that purports to be academically selective recruits C students because they are great football or basketball players and will enhance the sports program. When there are a sufficient number of those kids in the classroom, teachers have to teach to a lower common denominator.

Here is the reality of concessions. I was an Ivy League athlete in the 80s. I was admitted with the following concession. At the time, my Ivy School had average SAT scores for their admitted students of 1300 (this was in the days of the old schools. I got admitted with SATs of 1100. I believe this was a the bottom end of what they viewed was acceptable, even discounting for athlete concessions. Admission process aside, I was absolutely required to do the same level of work and course load as any other student. There were no favors granted. Once in, you had to cut it.

I don't believe it is much different today at the Ivys. It is more dramatic at other high quality schools.

Again, it is all relative. No need to defend Potomac's record in their own conference or against similar level school outside of their conference. Potomac is very competitive against the schools that are in their conference (Flint Hill, Maret, Sidwell, etc.). They are not competitive against the Landons, Georgetown Preps, public schools, etc. There is nothing wrong with this for this is by the school's design. It is simply a matter of what the parents/student is looking for in terms of athletic excellence.

I think you can balance a strong athletic program with strong academics, and I believe schools like Sidwell and Potomac are great examples of top schools doing just that. You can't really expect to compare them to single sex schools like Landon, Prep, StA, NCS, etc. because, as should be obvious, those schools have a much larger pool of males or females to draw from for their respective teams (ie. coed schools have 1/2 the available player pool than single sex schools for their basketball team).

The very top coed academic schools like Sidwell and Potomac have to balance a strong commitment to athletics with the realization that their academic programs are tough, and they're just not structured to have a "gifted" and "normal" academic track like some schools - if you are accepted, you are expected to keep up with the class. It's very similar to college - Ivy League schools are just not as competitive with sports as a big state schools. In certain sports they do very well, but in the big team sports (basketball, football, etc) they lag if you compare them to the big state programs.

All this being said, you just simply need to look at the sports records of schools like Potomac and Sidwell to see that they are quite competitive. Maybe not every single year in every single sport, but they don't generally field teams that lose consistently. Here's a sample of successful winning records of Potomac teams both current (playing right now), and from the last few years:

2010 Lacrosse Boys - currently 7-3
2010 Lacrosse Girls - currently 9-5
2010 Boys Baseball - currently 12-2
2010 Girls Softball - currently 8-2
2010 Boys Tennis - currently 15-1
2009 Boys Soccer - 13-5-3
2009 Boys Lacrosse - 7-3 (MAC Champs)
2009 Girls Soccer - 8-2-2
2009 Football - 7-3
2009 Boys Basketball - 15-9
2008 Boys Basketball - 23-6 (State Champs)
2009 Lacrosse Girls - 13-7
2008 Lacrosse Girls - 15-6 (State Champs)

Always is nice to combat perception with hard facts. I'm not sure how anyone could look at the above and think that Potomac's sports programs are not generally quite strong, especially when considering they are considered one of the top academic private schools in the country. If you looked at Sidwell's records, you would see similar patterns.

PP, I'd be interested in knowing which other coed private schools out there do a better job of balancing top academics and top athletics (and arts, social, etc too).

The PP expressed concern that Potomac wouldn't grant "concessions" for "excellent athletes." Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought he/she meant that the school wouldn't lower its admission standards or wouldn't cut students any academic slack to recruit/retain such students. That WOULD be lowering academic standards, wouldn't it? If a student truly meets admission standards but asks to be excused from some academic requirements because of outside sports commitments (such as tournament travel). that wouldn't bother me, because it doesn't affect other kids. What bothers me is when a private school that purports to be academically selective recruits C students because they are great football or basketball players and will enhance the sports program. When there are a sufficient number of those kids in the classroom, teachers have to teach to a lower common denominator.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:27,

This is because the school clearly places academics over athletics.

Quick! Tell me how I can get my sons into Potomac!! My sons so don't want to go to one of those sports powerhouses and get stuck in classes with dim bulbs who are only there because they can throw/kick/catch/hit a ball (which by the way my sons can do, too). It changes the whole classroom dynamic. I'm all for scholar-athletes, or scholar-artists, or whatever talent kids have, but why on earth do you want the schools to lower their standards to improve their sports teams? Is that really what you're advocating? That just makes the educational experience worse for everyone else. If Potomac really puts academics first, as you say, and keeps the extracurriculars "extra," tell us how to sign up, please!

Another parent who can't fathom that a school can possibly have both great academics and great athletics. Do you really think think that they can't coexist? That's the whole point, you don't have to lower standards on either one.

PP, I think you miss the point. You don't have to have a lesser quality athletics program to have academic standards. Speaking of bad athletics programs - I have toured Little Langley twice ... years apart ... for LS admission. The gym class was not inspiring. At all. The kids looked bored waving silk ribbons. My child spent time there - was ordered to jog around the gym until the teacher himself said "he was bored" of that and had them do something as inspiring as jumping jacks. I actually thought of telling the school after - because I do think it is a very good school - about this impression (which convinced my child that would not be the right place, if such rote exercise would be expected on a regular basis -- my child is athletic because it's fun, not boring). So if a Langley parent is reading this, perhaps you could evaluate the issue fairly. Watch a few gym classes of, say, K and 3rd grade. I think there are a lot more fun things that could be done.

Anonymous wrote:12:27,

This is because the school clearly places academics over athletics.

Quick! Tell me how I can get my sons into Potomac!! My sons so don't want to go to one of those sports powerhouses and get stuck in classes with dim bulbs who are only there because they can throw/kick/catch/hit a ball (which by the way my sons can do, too). It changes the whole classroom dynamic. I'm all for scholar-athletes, or scholar-artists, or whatever talent kids have, but why on earth do you want the schools to lower their standards to improve their sports teams? Is that really what you're advocating? That just makes the educational experience worse for everyone else. If Potomac really puts academics first, as you say, and keeps the extracurriculars "extra," tell us how to sign up, please!

12:27, regarding your post.

I will defer to you on the Potomac parents' demeanor. You are after all, a family there, and would have a better first hand perspective than I would. It was a negative for us however, based on knowing several dozen groups of parents at the school.

I will push back on the athletics difference however, in one way. It is all relative. I would say that yes Potomac is competitive with their peers (Sidwell, Flint Hill, Maret, etc.) across a number of sports. Certainly they are not on the same level as a Landon, Georgetown Prep, and others. But that is not their targeted competition. However, I have also really seen them struggle with a number of their key programs (boys and girls basketball, boys lacrosse, and others) to hold onto good coaches. This is because the school clearly places academics over athletics. Many of the coaches get frustrated with their inability to get any kind of concession for excellent athletes, and also to retain them (the occasional excellent athlete there often ends up transferring to other schools that place a higher emphasis on athletics with a high commitment to academics). That is some of the reasons while they lose some of the good coaches and athletes. If high level athletics are not important in your considerations then this is ok. I guess what I saying is that if there was a better balance (and it is proven this can be accomplished without comprising academics) the school could be fulfilling a higher level of potential.

Concerning Langley's preschool gender issue - my DD was in a preschool class that was 60% boys. There were enough girls that I wasn't concerned, because it was a very small class with 2 teachers, and my DD played with both boys and girls. But if there were less than 4 girls, I might have been more worried. This year I think there are 4 girls in one preschool class and 5 in the other. Both classes have more boys than girls - I think they are both about 60% boys. The JK class tends to be less boy heavy, and has 2 larger classes so there are more little friends to play with/choose from. I noticed that the K class was evenly split between boys and girls based on the directory this year, so they must be mindful of correcting this by K. Its true that the imbalance is a result of siblings though. I know last year and this year there are very few opening for male non siblings.

One thing I like about Langley is the sibling policy. I hadn't given it too much thought when I first applied, and I think Potomac is a great school. However, the idea of having one kid at one school and the other somewhere else is not what I want for my family. I understand it if there is some reason for sending your kids to two different schools. But Langley is a very family-oriented environment, and I think most families go there expecting to be highly committed to the one school. This results in a very strong parent community.

PP, you got the explanation to the Potomac language / music description correctly. That is what they told us 5 years ago when we looked for K for one child. This year, for another child, it was suggested that there could be cuts to some programs due to budgetary issues. That sounded a bit odd, given that the school can set its tuition to cover costs, but perhaps it was just a way to remind applicants that if they came to the school, they would be expected to contribute more than just tuition.

We considered, applied to and were accepted at both schools for K this coming fall. We chose Potomac, but we were impressed by both. Ultimately, the decision came down to Potomac's being a K - 12 school. We listened to the arguments that K - 8 is better because the middle schoolers are able to take on more leadership roles, they are not exposed to some of the high school issues too early, and none of the resources of the school are diverted to the high school. I think these are valid reasons for choosing a K-8 school. We thought, though, that Potomac's separation of the schools into lower, middle, intermediate and upper addressed the first and second issues. In the end, we felt that not having to choose another school and go through admissions at 8th grade was a huge benefit. I like to think we were not swayed by reputation or the feeling that "a school that accepts a smaller percentage of applicants is better," but we probably were.

Since we're headed to Potomac in the fall and haven't experienced the school yet, my comments are not as valuble as those from parents who have children at the school. I will mention some of the things we liked about both schools. You should certainly tour both in the fall/ winter. Things that stood out about Potomac: the lower school classrooms are spacious and flooded with natural light -- I think the atmosphere a child learns in is so important; the lower school playground is phenomenal - huge, a beautiful, natural setting and lots of equipment that is designed to work only when used by 2 or more children to encourage teamwork (again I think at the early ages outdoor play is very important); the science room is wonderful - filled with light and lots of animals. We attended a Friday assembly and were impressed by how these really young students were clearly comfortable and excited about getting up and performing for their peers. The children in the audience were so well behaved and seemed to be entranced by watching the children in other grades. The parents whom we talked with said that their children love coming to school and were sad on the snowdays this year because they missed school. For the early years, that summed it up for me. I did not pay a lot of attention to middle/ upper schools, but I do like the fact that middle schoolers must wear uniforms. I think the pressure in these wealthy communities to dress well, particularly for girls, can make things really difficult during adolescence. Negatives: children bring lunch or eat what the AD described as an "airline meal." We were not even shown the lunchroom, leading me to think it's not particularly nice. No language offered until the 4th grade. The Head of School, during the playdate, bascially said that studies have shown that music studies help the brain in young children in the same way as language studies do and Potomac's early music program is so strong, there's not a real need for language study at that early age (I'm sure I'm oversimplifyng and this was just a brief response to a parent's question -- BTW, the Head of School was VERY impressive and that's another reason we chose Potomac -- I think under his guidance the school will only improve. I'm not sure what to make of the middle schoolers using only laptops. It was strange to look into a classroom and see all the students with headphones on, glued to their computer screens.

Langley. Positives: admissions staff was very friendly and helpful, school renovations (including a beautiful lunchroom and gymnasium) were well conceived and executed; we watched a preschool class in progress and were very impressed with the teaching; Negative: I was concerned when we visited a preschool class that it was almost entirely boys (I think there were 2 girls) Admissions told us that was because of a large number of sibling boy legacies that year. I think balance is important, though. I'm not sure it's easy to "correct" such a huge imbalance in a class. I'm not sure I'd want my girl in that class.

We know parents at both schools and find both communities to be warm, welcoming, friendly and would have been happy to be part of either. Good luck with your applictions and decision making next year!

Potomac and Langley, with their wonderful reputations, are understandably the "go to" schools for McLean. However, I suspect Norwood sometimes is unnecessarily overlooked based on "logistics" alone because it is across the bridge and perceived as being farther away than it really is. Depending on where you live in McLean, Norwood generally is 15-20 minutes away. Many families travel to Norwood from DC and other locations that are much farther away. We chose Norwood for a number of reasons, including foreign language starting in K, extremely robust art, music and drama, expansive grounds, ability to drop off and pick up our child, short daily "chapel," small groups for math and reading, award-winning character education program and numerous personal touches like the lower school head shaking hands and greeting each student by name each day. Some of the ways that Norwood differs from Potomac and Langley will have no appeal or be considered drawbacks to some parents comparing schools, but Norwood's "distinctives" might be of interest to others.