Anonymous wrote:Which one are you, OP?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Name the schools. Really doubt one has more of either—every school we’ve encountered has a solid mix of both. The key is finding enough of 3: Volunteers and is involved with school but not overly so. This group is still managing ECs for their kid and still angling for top colleges but they are at least less in your face about it and are more willing to allow their kid a slightly longer leash.
I'm on board with group 3: Laid back, but present; a part of the community, not dominating it; give the kids agency, but guide them to stay on track; believe in lessons learned from mistakes, so make sure they have enough responsibility to make mistakes, but are watchful enough to make sure they learn through consequences; high goals, but humble; see "competitive" as teaching kids to work hard toward their personal best, which is is elevated by strong competition, not knocking down the competition, and certainly not through inappropriate means; believe in teamwork, not hierarchy or anarchy.
I cannot imagine there is a place that could pull a big enough concentration of #3 to make it the dominant culture. People as a mass are too flawed for that.
I think many Catholic (not all) schools fit this bill.
The catholic schools near me take the kids who were expelled from the public schools. And the parents lean heavily socially conservative . I think this would be the worst fit, personally- judgmental , socially conservative families with kids who have serious behavioral issues in high school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Name the schools. Really doubt one has more of either—every school we’ve encountered has a solid mix of both. The key is finding enough of 3: Volunteers and is involved with school but not overly so. This group is still managing ECs for their kid and still angling for top colleges but they are at least less in your face about it and are more willing to allow their kid a slightly longer leash.
I'm on board with group 3: Laid back, but present; a part of the community, not dominating it; give the kids agency, but guide them to stay on track; believe in lessons learned from mistakes, so make sure they have enough responsibility to make mistakes, but are watchful enough to make sure they learn through consequences; high goals, but humble; see "competitive" as teaching kids to work hard toward their personal best, which is is elevated by strong competition, not knocking down the competition, and certainly not through inappropriate means; believe in teamwork, not hierarchy or anarchy.
I cannot imagine there is a place that could pull a big enough concentration of #3 to make it the dominant culture. People as a mass are too flawed for that.
I think many Catholic (not all) schools fit this bill.
Anonymous wrote:If those were the only 2 choices, I'd pick #2 because it's less risky, i.e. If my child is influenced by his peers, I think "competitive for grades" has fewer downsides than "loosely-supervised and wealthy".
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Name the schools. Really doubt one has more of either—every school we’ve encountered has a solid mix of both. The key is finding enough of 3: Volunteers and is involved with school but not overly so. This group is still managing ECs for their kid and still angling for top colleges but they are at least less in your face about it and are more willing to allow their kid a slightly longer leash.
I'm on board with group 3: Laid back, but present; a part of the community, not dominating it; give the kids agency, but guide them to stay on track; believe in lessons learned from mistakes, so make sure they have enough responsibility to make mistakes, but are watchful enough to make sure they learn through consequences; high goals, but humble; see "competitive" as teaching kids to work hard toward their personal best, which is is elevated by strong competition, not knocking down the competition, and certainly not through inappropriate means; believe in teamwork, not hierarchy or anarchy.
I cannot imagine there is a place that could pull a big enough concentration of #3 to make it the dominant culture. People as a mass are too flawed for that.
I think many Catholic (not all) schools fit this bill.
Anonymous wrote:While 2 is more annoying, putting your school in 1 is more risky. The kids I knew that fit the 1st profile were heavy into drugs. They had the budget and connections to buy and no one to notice/care what they were doing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Name the schools. Really doubt one has more of either—every school we’ve encountered has a solid mix of both. The key is finding enough of 3: Volunteers and is involved with school but not overly so. This group is still managing ECs for their kid and still angling for top colleges but they are at least less in your face about it and are more willing to allow their kid a slightly longer leash.
I'm on board with group 3: Laid back, but present; a part of the community, not dominating it; give the kids agency, but guide them to stay on track; believe in lessons learned from mistakes, so make sure they have enough responsibility to make mistakes, but are watchful enough to make sure they learn through consequences; high goals, but humble; see "competitive" as teaching kids to work hard toward their personal best, which is is elevated by strong competition, not knocking down the competition, and certainly not through inappropriate means; believe in teamwork, not hierarchy or anarchy.
I cannot imagine there is a place that could pull a big enough concentration of #3 to make it the dominant culture. People as a mass are too flawed for that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Name the schools. Really doubt one has more of either—every school we’ve encountered has a solid mix of both. The key is finding enough of 3: Volunteers and is involved with school but not overly so. This group is still managing ECs for their kid and still angling for top colleges but they are at least less in your face about it and are more willing to allow their kid a slightly longer leash.
I'm on board with group 3: Laid back, but present; a part of the community, not dominating it; give the kids agency, but guide them to stay on track; believe in lessons learned from mistakes, so make sure they have enough responsibility to make mistakes, but are watchful enough to make sure they learn through consequences; high goals, but humble; see "competitive" as teaching kids to work hard toward their personal best, which is is elevated by strong competition, not knocking down the competition, and certainly not through inappropriate means; believe in teamwork, not hierarchy or anarchy.