Not sure what "arepaiute" means, but anyway I'm not of the Limbaugh/Beck ilk. So why not just object to the use of the word itself....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a strong cohort is real; whether it is an issue for one's child is harder to judge. Watching over several years our K-8 exmissions to SAES high school, I noted:
(a) SAES was the safety school, and accepted nearly 100% of applicants from our school; (b) the strongest kids never go there; (c) most of the kids that go there are relatively weaker. Our child applied and the school was kind and welcoming, but also made it clear they would not be able to meet DC's needs at the top end. I also know kids from the neighborhood who go there (and their parents), and these are not academically strong or motivated kids. So while the parent posts above are written in a convincing manner, almost as if the writers were not just parents but also were administrators, this pablum of these posts just does not jibe with my first hand experience.

Why does every positive post about a school get accused of being ghost-written by an administrator? Also, who really uses the word "pablum" any more apart from the Glenn Becks of the world?

Interesting response - nothing about the critical content, just ad hominum and complaining about the form of communication. BTW, to respond to YOUR point, if you have a HS student, you know pablum is one of those pesky SAT words that apparently lots of people think a person should know.

Sorry you could not infer that I find your accusation that any pro-SAES school posts were ghost-written, and your use of a Limbaugh-esque word like "pablum," made me conclude that you arepaiute possibly a jerk. I did not actually disagree with your substantive point about admissions at SAES, by the way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:20:17 is the type of parent/person that St. Andrew's is happy to avoid. Your experience is your own and St. Andrew's may not have been a good fit for your child but that does not mean very smart "top" kids don't go there. Perhaps the administrators at St. Andrew's knew that your parenting style was the type that they would rather avoid dealing with you and sent your child away. I cannot imagine any school would send away a bright kid. But they will send away parents whose egocentric attitudes are considered destructive and irritating rather than confident and forceful and beneficial to the school.

And about the kids and parents who go there not being motivated, what part of me making over 150K at 25 years old as an attorney with licenses before 2 states translates into unmotivated or academically weak? What, pray-tell, were you doing at 25? Were you on the moon? Were you CEO of a major corporation? Who knows but YOU ARE a tool. You know as well as every single person reading this that you would love for you child to succeed at whatever he or she does and if that happens to be as a lawyer, you know you want him/her to do what I did or clerk for SCOTUS. So whatever you think about your neighbors is irrelevant unless your entire parenting compass is keeping up with or surpassing the Jones of your neighborhood. Ugghhh--you disgust me. St. Andrew's dodged a bullet with you!

This is a little strange.

What part do you think is strange? Your comment is vague.

Anonymous wrote:20:17 is the type of parent/person that St. Andrew's is happy to avoid. Your experience is your own and St. Andrew's may not have been a good fit for your child but that does not mean very smart "top" kids don't go there. Perhaps the administrators at St. Andrew's knew that your parenting style was the type that they would rather avoid dealing with you and sent your child away. I cannot imagine any school would send away a bright kid. But they will send away parents whose egocentric attitudes are considered destructive and irritating rather than confident and forceful and beneficial to the school.

And about the kids and parents who go there not being motivated, what part of me making over 150K at 25 years old as an attorney with licenses before 2 states translates into unmotivated or academically weak? What, pray-tell, were you doing at 25? Were you on the moon? Were you CEO of a major corporation? Who knows but YOU ARE a tool. You know as well as every single person reading this that you would love for you child to succeed at whatever he or she does and if that happens to be as a lawyer, you know you want him/her to do what I did or clerk for SCOTUS. So whatever you think about your neighbors is irrelevant unless your entire parenting compass is keeping up with or surpassing the Jones of your neighborhood. Ugghhh--you disgust me. St. Andrew's dodged a bullet with you!

This is a little strange.

16:08 Again (weighing in for the first time since the 20:17 comment)

If the original poster is applying to SAES, I suggest you just call the admissions office and ask them to put you in touch with parents of students who may have a similar academic profile of your child or who would be in similar classes to get back to the original question about rigor. Putting aside various the opinions about the appropriate size of an “academic cohort,” the college lists, AP course info etc. provides some objective information which should make sense in the context discussed in prior posts.

As for the comments in 20:17/ 7:01, I will not doubt the sincerity of your personal experiences, but let’s be clear that nothing in your personal experience in any way really contradicts the bigger picture as reflected by objective data and personal experiences provided by alums and parents. Schools have different admissions patterns in different schools and communities – geography also plays a very important role. I would not venture to comment on your child – only you know what his/her academic needs were on the top end or how best to balance them with other factors. You also did not indicate how recently you had applied to SAES as schools continually evolve. When my first child began at SAES 5 years ago (a high SSAT type kid), the first thing we were told was that he would be challenged, and if he ever felt otherwise to contact the teacher, administration, etc. At one point he skipped a language level – I was worried but it worked out great. Our second child had some holes in her math background when she arrived at SAES a few years later because of gaps in the curriculum at her prior school, but is a fast learner. The school essentially allowed her to complete two years of math in one year so she could move into a more appropriate math class sooner. I know of several other students who have accelerated one way or another after arriving at SAES.

Beyond that, I will give Poster 20:17 the benefit of the doubt that she/he did not intend to offend the 500 students who attend SAES today, or the thousands of alumni, siblings, parents, and grandparents associated with the school – many of whom are now entrepreneurs, lawyers, engineers, musicians, teachers, and our famous television star alum. I certainly hope the poster did not intend to imply that all children who attend the school are "relatively weaker" students or lack "motivation" in general, as such an assertion would be demonstrably false, terribly insensitive, or worse. I had hoped to point this out sooner to avoid other reactions, but I am a bit late. I certainly can understand how anyone associated with the school in any way can reasonably feel quite offended by the post. However, having occasionally said some things myself that perhaps didn’t come out quite right, I’ll give the poster the benefit of the doubt on intentions. Further response to substance:

1. Yes, as stated in the posts above, one of the things SAES historically was known for was its ability to turn students around. For students entering the school for these reasons, rather than focus on acceptance statistics the better test of academic rigor and “success” of a school would be reflected by what do the students look like when then graduate relative to how they were doing when they got there. As one alum aptly explained above, SAES has had a transforming impact on many students. I don’t really care about comparisons of rigor between the many great schools in the DC area, but if I had to measure the quality of a school I would ask where my student was on Day 1 – academically, emotionally, socially, etc. – and where was he/she when he graduated, and did that trajectory go as expected, better than expected or fall short of expectations. I suspect if you asked that question to most SAES parents they would say their child’s development exceeded all expectations. While St. Andrew’s was historically a safety school for some families, it was a destination school for others. Most families that live near a good DC private school will probably select that school if their student is accepted. But in the past couple of years, I have heard of a few families – not most, but a few – who have affirmatively turned down an offer at a big name downtown school in favor of SAES. On the other hand, I have met many families who live closer to SAES who never considered any of the downtown schools and for whom the aura of such schools just doesn’t burn as bright. If St. Andrew’s were located in upper northwest, I suspect the DC community would have a clearer perception of the breadth of the program.

2. Focusing on admissions criteria is relevant, but itself is not at all dispositive of rigor. Students who do not perform well on standardized tests – one of the commonly used factors in private school admissions -- are not necessarily less bright than anyone else. We are no doubt also all familiar with students who do not take middle school seriously, then buckle down later in high school and get better grades. SAES also does have some students who have different learning styles – the school tends to avoid using the term learning disability (dyslexia, ADD, etc.) and instead focusses on all students ability to improve wherever they start from -- and for them it can take a bit longer to develop the skills needed to compensate for those challenges. I would add that some of the most poised, responsible, and hardest working students at SAES are those students. My own children do not have any of those challenges, but they have the utmost admiration for some of their friends who do and who have managed to pull high test grades (including on AP tests) and make equally important contributions to class discussions. Those students teach my kids a lot about character.

3. There is a flip side to the academic cohort issue. Because St. Andrew’s does have such a wider range of students, they tend to treat one another with almost universal respect and genuinely learn the value of one another. I am not saying that every student is best friends with every other – it’s the real world -- but on balance the student community itself is very welcoming and supportive. My kids have really nice friends. Perhaps that is partly because for some of the students at SAES school has never come easy – they may have to work very hard for an average grade which is a very good grade for them. The requirement that all kids do various arts, athletics, etc. – which I recognize is not unique there – also seems to contribute to a recognition that sometimes the best student may not excel somewhere else. Yes, a few kids will excel across the board, but in general my belief iis that having a school where there are a good number of students who have not always been the stars in everything they undertake has a positive impact on the culture of the school for all students – including those who do have had consistent academic success. Rarely does one hear that someone has gotten “too big for his britches at SAES.”

At the same time, I am sure that there are many thoughtful and sensitive children in other private schools with highly competitive admissions profiles, and I understand some kids thrive best in an environment where they feel driven by competition. On the other hand, parents of families who transfer from such schools to SAES are almost always struck by how welcomed their kids feel and how they seem happier– and in many cases this has less to do with the actual course content /rigor than the environment of being among perhaps a larger number of more driven families. It is certainly possible that the most intensely competitive environment may drive some children to excel to greater heights depending on the child, and each family of a student capable of such academic work must decide what will be best for their child’s overall health and wellbeing at a given age. Again, the cohort seems to work for the more academically oriented kids at SAES.

4. I have not heard reports that any recent graduates have had any trouble in their competitive colleges. One graduate was the valedictorian at Dartmouth a couple of years ago (you can verify this on the internet) – she was not the valedictorian at St. Andrew’s the year she graduated. On the other, St. Andrew’s has a broad range of learners. A few may even apply to schools that specifically support students with mild LD issues. I suspect you just don’t see that range at the Big X downtown schools, and when they do have students like that those schools they probably don’t want to advertise it. Those students can fit in at St. Andrews, along with the kids who have attended highly ranked universities and colleges, and the school strives to maintain a broad distribution. As explained previously, while they may share classes together early in their academic careers, these days they will not usually end up in the same academic classes with one another as they move up the academic chain at school, but they come together in a single community.

Unfortunately, I cannot invest the time now to provide any more thoughts on this as I do have other commitments, but I would encourage anyone considering SAES to give it a first hand look and decide for yourselves whether it will fit your child – regardless of whether you expect him/her to attend the most competitive colleges in the country or are looking to just maximize his/her potential if you’ve been told your child is average or has a different learning style. No school is perfect, but we have been consistently impressed with the school in all of its dimensions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the alum who wrote my feelings about the way the school was more than 15 years ago. The parent who wrote about the school today confirms what I have heard but do not know firsthand.

20:17 is the type of parent/person that St. Andrew's is happy to avoid. Your experience is your own and St. Andrew's may not have been a good fit for your child but that does not mean very smart "top" kids don't go there. Perhaps the administrators at St. Andrew's knew that your parenting style was the type that they would rather avoid dealing with you and sent your child away. I cannot imagine any school would send away a bright kid. But they will send away parents whose egocentric attitudes are considered destructive and irritating rather than confident and forceful and beneficial to the school.

And about the kids and parents who go there not being motivated, what part of me making over 150K at 25 years old as an attorney with licenses before 2 states translates into unmotivated or academically weak? What, pray-tell, were you doing at 25? Were you on the moon? Were you CEO of a major corporation? Who knows but YOU ARE a tool. You know as well as every single person reading this that you would love for you child to succeed at whatever he or she does and if that happens to be as a lawyer, you know you want him/her to do what I did or clerk for SCOTUS. So whatever you think about your neighbors is irrelevant unless your entire parenting compass is keeping up with or surpassing the Jones of your neighborhood. Ugghhh--you disgust me. St. Andrew's dodged a bullet with you!

I am not 20:17 but your response is way over the top. People are entitled to their impressions. Yes maybe the school is not for that parent but to belittle and berate that poster and call them names really does not make your case that you are educated or mature. You went to the school 15 years ago. School environments, missions and teachers can change so i am not sure why your 15 year old recollections are even relevant.

I disagree completely. First, I acknowledged the potentially dated aspects of my experience. Second, subsequent posters have verified that my experiences at St. Andrew's are still relevant. Third, my opinion is relevant because I actually went there whereas 20:17 did not. I got accepted to a lot of colleges that I did not attend and would not pretend for one second to be an authority on those schools. That is what 20:17 did. She was rude and I am calling her out on it. That poster made several completely out of line and hyperbolic statements with virtual no support for her comments. Speculation about her neighbors is NOT the same as the views of a parent of a student or an alum. She (or perhaps he) was out of line and I believe that it is important to remind parents (and yes I am one now too) that education is a means to an end--not the end itself. If she is picking schools for her child based completely on reputation and the success of the graduates, then discounting real accounts of parents and students who have achieved actual success at the school seems completely idiotic. Doesn't it?

It made me conclude that she is not actually participating in the conversation about St. Andrew's to provide insight to people who might consider the school but is instead throwing rude and unfounded comments into the mix to serve some unknown need. If her kid was really better than St. Andrew's, why would she even bother participating in this dialogue. Most people in such a situation would not bother if they had an iota of tact and class. If she is the kind who prides herself on putting down others, then she is the tool I said she is and she and her kid would not have been welcome at St. Andrew's. So, if I am so rude, whatever. I went there, the school was great, I am successful and I am proud to say that St. Andrew's played a part in helping me become successful in my career and in life. Compare my posts about the school with hers and consider again whether I am the rude one or if she is. Unless you are 20:17 and now defending your idiotic post!

Anonymous wrote:I am the alum who wrote my feelings about the way the school was more than 15 years ago. The parent who wrote about the school today confirms what I have heard but do not know firsthand.

20:17 is the type of parent/person that St. Andrew's is happy to avoid. Your experience is your own and St. Andrew's may not have been a good fit for your child but that does not mean very smart "top" kids don't go there. Perhaps the administrators at St. Andrew's knew that your parenting style was the type that they would rather avoid dealing with you and sent your child away. I cannot imagine any school would send away a bright kid. But they will send away parents whose egocentric attitudes are considered destructive and irritating rather than confident and forceful and beneficial to the school.

And about the kids and parents who go there not being motivated, what part of me making over 150K at 25 years old as an attorney with licenses before 2 states translates into unmotivated or academically weak? What, pray-tell, were you doing at 25? Were you on the moon? Were you CEO of a major corporation? Who knows but YOU ARE a tool. You know as well as every single person reading this that you would love for you child to succeed at whatever he or she does and if that happens to be as a lawyer, you know you want him/her to do what I did or clerk for SCOTUS. So whatever you think about your neighbors is irrelevant unless your entire parenting compass is keeping up with or surpassing the Jones of your neighborhood. Ugghhh--you disgust me. St. Andrew's dodged a bullet with you!

I am not 20:17 but your response is way over the top. People are entitled to their impressions. Yes maybe the school is not for that parent but to belittle and berate that poster and call them names really does not make your case that you are educated or mature. You went to the school 15 years ago. School environments, missions and teachers can change so i am not sure why your 15 year old recollections are even relevant.

I am the alum who wrote my feelings about the way the school was more than 15 years ago. The parent who wrote about the school today confirms what I have heard but do not know firsthand.

20:17 is the type of parent/person that St. Andrew's is happy to avoid. Your experience is your own and St. Andrew's may not have been a good fit for your child but that does not mean very smart "top" kids don't go there. Perhaps the administrators at St. Andrew's knew that your parenting style was the type that they would rather avoid dealing with you and sent your child away. I cannot imagine any school would send away a bright kid. But they will send away parents whose egocentric attitudes are considered destructive and irritating rather than confident and forceful and beneficial to the school.

And about the kids and parents who go there not being motivated, what part of me making over 150K at 25 years old as an attorney with licenses before 2 states translates into unmotivated or academically weak? What, pray-tell, were you doing at 25? Were you on the moon? Were you CEO of a major corporation? Who knows but YOU ARE a tool. You know as well as every single person reading this that you would love for you child to succeed at whatever he or she does and if that happens to be as a lawyer, you know you want him/her to do what I did or clerk for SCOTUS. So whatever you think about your neighbors is irrelevant unless your entire parenting compass is keeping up with or surpassing the Jones of your neighborhood. Ugghhh--you disgust me. St. Andrew's dodged a bullet with you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a strong cohort is real; whether it is an issue for one's child is harder to judge. Watching over several years our K-8 exmissions to SAES high school, I noted:
(a) SAES was the safety school, and accepted nearly 100% of applicants from our school; (b) the strongest kids never go there; (c) most of the kids that go there are relatively weaker. Our child applied and the school was kind and welcoming, but also made it clear they would not be able to meet DC's needs at the top end. I also know kids from the neighborhood who go there (and their parents), and these are not academically strong or motivated kids. So while the parent posts above are written in a convincing manner, almost as if the writers were not just parents but also were administrators, this pablum of these posts just does not jibe with my first hand experience.

Why does every positive post about a school get accused of being ghost-written by an administrator? Also, who really uses the word "pablum" any more apart from the Glenn Becks of the world?

Interesting response - nothing about the critical content, just ad hominum and complaining about the form of communication. BTW, to respond to YOUR point, if you have a HS student, you know pablum is one of those pesky SAT words that apparently lots of people think a person should know.

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a strong cohort is real; whether it is an issue for one's child is harder to judge. Watching over several years our K-8 exmissions to SAES high school, I noted:
(a) SAES was the safety school, and accepted nearly 100% of applicants from our school; (b) the strongest kids never go there; (c) most of the kids that go there are relatively weaker. Our child applied and the school was kind and welcoming, but also made it clear they would not be able to meet DC's needs at the top end. I also know kids from the neighborhood who go there (and their parents), and these are not academically strong or motivated kids. So while the parent posts above are written in a convincing manner, almost as if the writers were not just parents but also were administrators, this pablum of these posts just does not jibe with my first hand experience.

Why does every positive post about a school get accused of being ghost-written by an administrator? Also, who really uses the word "pablum" any more apart from the Glenn Becks of the world?

That is all.

The lack of a strong cohort is real; whether it is an issue for one's child is harder to judge. Watching over several years our K-8 exmissions to SAES high school, I noted:
(a) SAES was the safety school, and accepted nearly 100% of applicants from our school; (b) the strongest kids never go there; (c) most of the kids that go there are relatively weaker. Our child applied and the school was kind and welcoming, but also made it clear they would not be able to meet DC's needs at the top end. I also know kids from the neighborhood who go there (and their parents), and these are not academically strong or motivated kids. So while the parent posts above are written in a convincing manner, almost as if the writers were not just parents but also were administrators, this pablum of these posts just does not jibe with my first hand experience.

Great posts, 16:08 -- thank you!

16:08 again:

Teaching staff is really outstanding. On a regular basis, our kids sit around the dinner table and tell us about what their favorite teachers (several for each of them) did or said in class that day (often something funny that came up). The administration is very responsive (within reason) and views students and parents in a partnership with the school.

I think the St. Andrew’s alum provides a very good overview of a culture at St. Andrew’s that remains well engrained today. I am another current SAES parent and will try to answer a few questions from earlier posts about the status of things today at St. Andrews and offer our own experience with another private school as well.

We moved to SAES from a feeder school that also feeds the independent schools in DC ( GDS, Maret, Sidwell, Burke, etc.) during middle school years, and we found St. Andrew’s overall a reasonable, step up in rigor/expectations, etc. in middle school. Both my children (who moved separately) found the transition remarkably easy. When discussing rigor many of the usual metrics are of less value at SAES because SAES is different by design then some of the downtown schools -- it was founded on the premise of being an alternative to St. Albans or NCS – a coed school that would be welcoming to a broader range of learners. There are many stories like the one told by the alum above at St. Andrews. There are also many other students there who were doing well at another school – often a school that ends after primary or middle school – and affirmatively have chosen St. Andrew’s for any number of reasons. I would imagine that the welcoming environment, strong creative teachers, and the emphasis on balance are probably the most popular reasons families like the school.

The rigor and academic cohort questions. It is true that the culture of St. Andrew’s is to resist “tracking.” It is also true, however, that the range of student abilities and interests is sufficiently varied that as they move up through high school there is a certain more natural self-selection of courses based on interests and ability. Because this is done gradually and the students all participate together in other required activities (sports teams, art classes, etc.) as well as clubs, the social cohorts that are formed are not based solely on academic profiles. But in response to one concern noted in a prior post, the students who excel most in academics do tend to find and support one another at SAES– they find that academic “cohort” if you will – but I would want to emphasize that St. Andrew’s remains a place where very different kids come together as friends Having 16 or so kids in a given AP class provides a sufficient, healthy sized cohort on the academic front.

In middle school, all students take the same classes except that some students are separated by math placement and the speed with which they acquire foreign languages. In high school, students select (faculty recommend) placement in regular or accelerated classes in math and some sciences, and by 10th grade, students have the option of the regular high school history classes or AP classes. (AP European Hist was added in 2011-12 for 10th grade). I assume there are some students do not take any AP or accelerated classes, while others may take one, two or three APs during their junior/senior years plus accelerated courses in other subjects, and I think there may be an occasionally student who takes four APs, but that would be very unusual. The curriculum guide on the web shows now a total of 17 AP or equivalent college level classes if I counted right (12 APs on campus, 2 college equiv’s on campus, and 3 AP Consortium courses for seniors). Seniors in the consortium classes are in the same classes with kids from Holton, Stone Ridge, etc. As for the question about math/science, St. Andrew’s offers AP bio, Chem II (college level class), Physics (II) (college level class), AP calc. AB, AP statistics and multivariable calculus. Kids who finish AB calc. can take multivariable calc. at the consortium. I think the lack of a Calc BC class has more to do with the historic view of the school not to track students too young or pushing them too fast in middle school, but that should not be seen as an overall measure of rigor at the school. Now that it’s a K-12 school, I wouldn’t be surprised to see calc BC added at some point, but as far as I know this is not been an area of much concern even among the parents of the pre-engineering/math/science types.


Colleges. As for colleges, the alum posted the link to the school web site where you can see acceptances and matriculations over the past 5 years. The list is very diverse since the kids are so different. Obviously, a smaller school that is open to a wider range of students in the first place will not send a quarter of the class to the ivy league. While the list doesn’t tell you how many kids attended each school, I would guess a good chunk of the each class (but less than 50%) ends up at schools that accept fewer than 30% of all applicants, including each year on average a couple going to an ivy league school (which ones vary each year) and many competitive liberal arts schools. In 2012, for example, graduates attended schools like UPenn, Duke (2), Bowdoin, Middlebury, Davidson, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Carnegie Melon, Colby, Kenyon, etc. Then there is another group of students that attend large schools like USC, Wake Forest, U. MD, U of Miami, Wisconsin, etc. , in addition to many other liberal arts schools that may be the right fit for particular students, as well as the occasional arts/music programs. Some students have also chosen private schools that may be a notch below where they could have landed to take advantage of merit scholarship offers.


Honor rolls. Y es, St. Andrew’s has four of them: a regular academic and high academic, and a regular effort and high effort honor role. Students who do well in their classes (whether or not they are accelerated) can make honor roles. It is part of the culture of affirming the value of every student there. Honors days (3x per year) are wonderful times when the student body comes together and celebrates one another academically. They do similar assemblies on different days each year for athletics and arts awards. The school tries to be true to its core beliefs about working hard to foster an atmosphere that downplays internal competition while motivating them to push themselves to do their best, while still requiring all students to take a certain number of courses the arts, religion, community service etc., and most students participate in interscholastic sports.

My general impression is that both are pretty high - and I'm a poster who has not been so supportive of the idea that SAES is very rigorous with "top" students who go to "top" colleges.