Anonymous wrote:The bubble that comes with it is the social cost of private schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The diversity and inclusivity at these schools is window dressing to make everyone involved feel better and deflect criticism. To some extent it's also to create an environment more similar to elite colleges, which do the exact same thing.

A lot of the diversity at these schools (both elite private K-12s and elite private colleges) comes from people with generational wealthy who have minority and/or international backgrounds. So children at these schools are unlikely to encounter ANY of the poor black and hispanic children who fill public school classrooms in the city, but they are highly likely to be with the children of ambassadors, people in the upper levels of the World Bank and certain NGOs, elite lawyers and business people, many of whom are not white. Also your kids are more likely to have classmates of Asian or South Asian descent at these privates than they will at any DCPS outside of upper northwest, many of which have zero or less than 1% asian students even when the surrounding neighborhoods have Asian families.

This is what elite education looks like in 2024. An all white school would not only be suspected of being racist, it would be considered a detriment in the market because parents want their kids to acclimate to diverse environments like those they will find in college and in elite workplaces -- you aren't going to find many investment banks, law firms, operating rooms, or board rooms filled exclusively with white, American born professionals these days.

But it's a certain kind of diversity. Elite diversity. International backgrounds are prized, the non-white population skews away from black and hispanic Americans and Latin American immigrant families (which is where most diversity in public schools comes from) and toward AAPI, mixed race, and wealthy foreign families.

I say this all neutrally. Not a criticism. Just pointing out that when people in elite institutions talk about diversity, they aren't really talking about the same sort of diversity that people in other settings are talking about. There is little economic diversity and the racial and ethnic diversity you find is fundamentally different as a result.

Diversity/inclusivitiy is not just ethnic/racial diversity. I would argue it's easier to be LGBTQ+, or even just nerdy or non-sporty at certain private schools. GDS has a very "you do you" culture where students are encouraged to be themselves, pursue their own interests, etc. Groups of kids intermingle vs jocks/non-jocks. This just isn't true at all schools.

How easy is it to be an english language learner at GDS? How easy is it to be poor (not we get aid and make 300k a year poor, but real poor)? How easy is it to be SPED?

Anonymous wrote:The bubble that comes with it is the social cost of private schools.

Anonymous wrote: My public high school is 5.5% black, my kid’s private school is 14%. But we all know this was a $hit stirring post not a reality based one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The diversity and inclusivity at these schools is window dressing to make everyone involved feel better and deflect criticism. To some extent it's also to create an environment more similar to elite colleges, which do the exact same thing.

A lot of the diversity at these schools (both elite private K-12s and elite private colleges) comes from people with generational wealthy who have minority and/or international backgrounds. So children at these schools are unlikely to encounter ANY of the poor black and hispanic children who fill public school classrooms in the city, but they are highly likely to be with the children of ambassadors, people in the upper levels of the World Bank and certain NGOs, elite lawyers and business people, many of whom are not white. Also your kids are more likely to have classmates of Asian or South Asian descent at these privates than they will at any DCPS outside of upper northwest, many of which have zero or less than 1% asian students even when the surrounding neighborhoods have Asian families.

This is what elite education looks like in 2024. An all white school would not only be suspected of being racist, it would be considered a detriment in the market because parents want their kids to acclimate to diverse environments like those they will find in college and in elite workplaces -- you aren't going to find many investment banks, law firms, operating rooms, or board rooms filled exclusively with white, American born professionals these days.

But it's a certain kind of diversity. Elite diversity. International backgrounds are prized, the non-white population skews away from black and hispanic Americans and Latin American immigrant families (which is where most diversity in public schools comes from) and toward AAPI, mixed race, and wealthy foreign families.

I say this all neutrally. Not a criticism. Just pointing out that when people in elite institutions talk about diversity, they aren't really talking about the same sort of diversity that people in other settings are talking about. There is little economic diversity and the racial and ethnic diversity you find is fundamentally different as a result.

Diversity/inclusivitiy is not just ethnic/racial diversity. I would argue it's easier to be LGBTQ+, or even just nerdy or non-sporty at certain private schools. GDS has a very "you do you" culture where students are encouraged to be themselves, pursue their own interests, etc. Groups of kids intermingle vs jocks/non-jocks. This just isn't true at all schools.

Yes, I guess you could say that when GDS costs $50K+ a year to attend, and their HOS makes over a million dollars salary, the only color they see is green.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The diversity and inclusivity at these schools is window dressing to make everyone involved feel better and deflect criticism. To some extent it's also to create an environment more similar to elite colleges, which do the exact same thing.

A lot of the diversity at these schools (both elite private K-12s and elite private colleges) comes from people with generational wealthy who have minority and/or international backgrounds. So children at these schools are unlikely to encounter ANY of the poor black and hispanic children who fill public school classrooms in the city, but they are highly likely to be with the children of ambassadors, people in the upper levels of the World Bank and certain NGOs, elite lawyers and business people, many of whom are not white. Also your kids are more likely to have classmates of Asian or South Asian descent at these privates than they will at any DCPS outside of upper northwest, many of which have zero or less than 1% asian students even when the surrounding neighborhoods have Asian families.

This is what elite education looks like in 2024. An all white school would not only be suspected of being racist, it would be considered a detriment in the market because parents want their kids to acclimate to diverse environments like those they will find in college and in elite workplaces -- you aren't going to find many investment banks, law firms, operating rooms, or board rooms filled exclusively with white, American born professionals these days.

But it's a certain kind of diversity. Elite diversity. International backgrounds are prized, the non-white population skews away from black and hispanic Americans and Latin American immigrant families (which is where most diversity in public schools comes from) and toward AAPI, mixed race, and wealthy foreign families.

I say this all neutrally. Not a criticism. Just pointing out that when people in elite institutions talk about diversity, they aren't really talking about the same sort of diversity that people in other settings are talking about. There is little economic diversity and the racial and ethnic diversity you find is fundamentally different as a result.

Diversity/inclusivitiy is not just ethnic/racial diversity. I would argue it's easier to be LGBTQ+, or even just nerdy or non-sporty at certain private schools. GDS has a very "you do you" culture where students are encouraged to be themselves, pursue their own interests, etc. Groups of kids intermingle vs jocks/non-jocks. This just isn't true at all schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The diversity and inclusivity at these schools is window dressing to make everyone involved feel better and deflect criticism. To some extent it's also to create an environment more similar to elite colleges, which do the exact same thing.

A lot of the diversity at these schools (both elite private K-12s and elite private colleges) comes from people with generational wealthy who have minority and/or international backgrounds. So children at these schools are unlikely to encounter ANY of the poor black and hispanic children who fill public school classrooms in the city, but they are highly likely to be with the children of ambassadors, people in the upper levels of the World Bank and certain NGOs, elite lawyers and business people, many of whom are not white. Also your kids are more likely to have classmates of Asian or South Asian descent at these privates than they will at any DCPS outside of upper northwest, many of which have zero or less than 1% asian students even when the surrounding neighborhoods have Asian families.

This is what elite education looks like in 2024. An all white school would not only be suspected of being racist, it would be considered a detriment in the market because parents want their kids to acclimate to diverse environments like those they will find in college and in elite workplaces -- you aren't going to find many investment banks, law firms, operating rooms, or board rooms filled exclusively with white, American born professionals these days.

But it's a certain kind of diversity. Elite diversity. International backgrounds are prized, the non-white population skews away from black and hispanic Americans and Latin American immigrant families (which is where most diversity in public schools comes from) and toward AAPI, mixed race, and wealthy foreign families.

I say this all neutrally. Not a criticism. Just pointing out that when people in elite institutions talk about diversity, they aren't really talking about the same sort of diversity that people in other settings are talking about. There is little economic diversity and the racial and ethnic diversity you find is fundamentally different as a result.

Diversity/inclusivitiy is not just ethnic/racial diversity. I would argue it's easier to be LGBTQ+, or even just nerdy or non-sporty at certain private schools. GDS has a very "you do you" culture where students are encouraged to be themselves, pursue their own interests, etc. Groups of kids intermingle vs jocks/non-jocks. This just isn't true at all schools.

Anonymous wrote:The diversity and inclusivity at these schools is window dressing to make everyone involved feel better and deflect criticism. To some extent it's also to create an environment more similar to elite colleges, which do the exact same thing.

A lot of the diversity at these schools (both elite private K-12s and elite private colleges) comes from people with generational wealthy who have minority and/or international backgrounds. So children at these schools are unlikely to encounter ANY of the poor black and hispanic children who fill public school classrooms in the city, but they are highly likely to be with the children of ambassadors, people in the upper levels of the World Bank and certain NGOs, elite lawyers and business people, many of whom are not white. Also your kids are more likely to have classmates of Asian or South Asian descent at these privates than they will at any DCPS outside of upper northwest, many of which have zero or less than 1% asian students even when the surrounding neighborhoods have Asian families.

This is what elite education looks like in 2024. An all white school would not only be suspected of being racist, it would be considered a detriment in the market because parents want their kids to acclimate to diverse environments like those they will find in college and in elite workplaces -- you aren't going to find many investment banks, law firms, operating rooms, or board rooms filled exclusively with white, American born professionals these days.

But it's a certain kind of diversity. Elite diversity. International backgrounds are prized, the non-white population skews away from black and hispanic Americans and Latin American immigrant families (which is where most diversity in public schools comes from) and toward AAPI, mixed race, and wealthy foreign families.

I say this all neutrally. Not a criticism. Just pointing out that when people in elite institutions talk about diversity, they aren't really talking about the same sort of diversity that people in other settings are talking about. There is little economic diversity and the racial and ethnic diversity you find is fundamentally different as a result.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it’s the central tension of GDS for me as an alumna, at least. GDS does a great job describing and cultivating its community but does a terrible job explaining why the GDS model (highly selective and expensive private school) is good for The Community. When it was founded, it had a great answer, which was that the public schools were not integrated.

I actually think there are some good and defensible arguments for the school as it is but they are unspoken. The silence around it is really out of character for the school, and too me it is shameful.

Can you give us a single one? It's ok to admit that you send a kid to an exclusive school and that the exclusivity allows for a better academic experience.

Yeah, you just made one. “The exclusivity allows for a better academic experience” is a good argument, especially if you pair it with “giving our students a better academic experience enables them to do more or greater good,” etc.

I would also expect arguments like the private school governance model is more nimble or specialized than the public school bureaucracy, it enables the school to be focused on a specific mission, things like that.

I would also expect arguments broad category of admissions policy justifications related to financial viability. Legacy preference, needing X% full pay, all of that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it’s the central tension of GDS for me as an alumna, at least. GDS does a great job describing and cultivating its community but does a terrible job explaining why the GDS model (highly selective and expensive private school) is good for The Community. When it was founded, it had a great answer, which was that the public schools were not integrated.

I actually think there are some good and defensible arguments for the school as it is but they are unspoken. The silence around it is really out of character for the school, and too me it is shameful.

Can you give us a single one? It's ok to admit that you send a kid to an exclusive school and that the exclusivity allows for a better academic experience.

Anonymous wrote: My public high school is 5.5% black, my kid’s private school is 14%. But we all know this was a $hit stirring post not a reality based one.

Anonymous wrote: My public high school is 5.5% black, my kid’s private school is 14%. But we all know this was a $hit stirring post not a reality based one.