Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that there is really any school to avoid. There are only two schools (1 private and 1 public) around here that I regularly hear of that can be like a pressure cooker, both academically and socially at times, but even those two seems to have other positives that cause the kids to love those schools despite that. They are Langley and Holton. Since Holton is for chicks, you don't need to be concerned about that. Since Langley is public, you don't need to be concerned about that either, and those kids will thrive and lead.

What are you smoking, PP? Holton and Langley? ROTFLMAO

Well, MAYBE Holton for some and depending on the class but generally it's a nicer environment.

Sidwell, NCS, STA, and TJ, those are the pressure cookers. If you don't know this I really doubt your kids are part of the DC area pschool scene.

You forgot to mention Potomac, Maret, Landon and a host of other schools that are similarly pressure-cookers in US. You are the one sounding ignorant.

No, I did not forget the schools you named. I do not agree with you. My kids looked at all of these schools and attend some and we have not found Potomac, Landon, or even Maret to be the kind of " pressure cooker" that we are discussing on this thread. In fact, I would agree with the poster who said some tracks at some Publics (like WhItman) are more akin to pressure cookers than the schools you name.

I have a kid at school I named a pressure cooker and a kid at one that I do not think is. Being called a "pressure cooker" is not, in my mind, a good
or bad thing. It also does not qualify a school as academically strong or weak. Its a environmental attitude that affects the entire student body. But It's personality-related as to what type of environment inspires and invigorates one.

For instance, Maret would have been the perfect school for me as a kid. I have an IQ over 140, was never a "super" athlete, love to try new things and hate to be pressured. Maret would have been great for me laregly because while academically tough and challenging, other parts of the environment are more supportive and conducive to kids who don't do well in a pressure cooker and are open to trying things they may not excel at.

Anonymous wrote:OP again - here's another example. Over on the MD school forum, there's a question about homework in high school: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/412045.page

On this thread, someone posted about a HS student having 5 tests in one day. This is EXACTLY what we hated about MCPS. The independent middle schools seem good about limiting the number of tests in one day (ours does not allow more than 2 per day). Are there similar limits/guidelines on number of tests per day even at the "pressure cooker" schools like Sidwell, GDS, etc?

Also, do the upper schools allow the kids to have PE every day, outdoor time, some breaks so that they are not eating lunch at 10:30 a.m. and then starving until 2:30 with only 5 minute breaks in between classes?

I think the factors below are what contribute to a high stress environment. This is really what we're trying to avoid. Is this something we have to be careful of even with independents, or are these problems unique to the local public schools?

- high pressure/high stakes testing, multiple tests (4 or more) on one day…
- stressed out teachers
- few or no breaks between classes a l a Advisory period or PE…do not want kid going for seven hours with only lunch and PE and 5 minutes between classes…

Thank you all!

I have had one in private and one in public. we are currently in an MCPS MS. We have PE every day. Lunch is at 12:30. We have never had 5 tests in one day even with finals. I don;t find the teachers stressed at all. Our teachers seem to care about the kids and preparing them for HS.

At the private, in HS, there is no way around that there is more pressure. Grades count and if you start taking AP's the pace of the class is much faster and the hw load is pretty high. Most privates have a sports commitment and an arts committment. that means you don't get home till 7 and start the 2-3 hours of HW. There is a study hall and a longer lunch but you really need to use those to do hw or study for tests or quizes otherwise you will have too much to do at home. You may not have 5 tests a day, but there will alwyas be something to do and when you add in SAT's, college apps etc, it gets to be a lot. In public, the HS kids get out at 2:15 every day. they have a lot of time to do HW and don't have the sports commitment after school except for those on teams.

The pressure is in both public and private for HS. The parents expect a lot from their kids and the kids get competitive with each other for getting grades and begin able to apply to top schools.

OP -- I believe at most privates kids do sports/PE at the end of their school day. At St. Andrew's, I believe there is a 15 minute break period about half way or 2/3 the way through the morning. Then there is the lunch break. More importantly, most teachers don't stand in front of a class and lecture 50 minutes. There are many opportunities in class for kids to get up and move around for group projects, lab work, etc. Not every class/every day -- you do learn to take notes, take tests, etc. too - but a lot of the teaching is designed to vary methods to keep it interesting for the kids. That is fundamentally probably the biggest difference from MCPS. They actually still do field trips as well in the high school once in a while. Many high school students also have a study hall period most trimesters which helps reduce the night time work load. My kids haven't been in HS in MCPS, but from what I hear it is very, very different. Go check out the schools you are interested in and let you child do a visit -- that should help put it all in perspective.

Can't speak about any other school, but at St. Andrew's our experience has been that that the students and teachers usually have very good, supportive relationships in the first place. The faculty very much believes in trying to find means of helping students learn to motivate themselves. Of course there are still outside motivations (grades, deadlines for parts of large projects, etc.) but most teachers structure things so that as long as the student is trying and is in an appropriate level class to begin with, he/she should be able to be reasonably successful. So long as students plan ahead and inform the teachers about a scheduling conflict that may interfere with a work deadline, they usually can work something out.

The key is that students need to feel comfortable approaching teachers, emailing them, etc., and the teachers need to know where to draw a line and where to be flexible. It is not unusual for my kids to email a teacher over a weekend or holiday break with a question about an assignment. They may not get an immediate reply -- and we sometimes discourage them from asking unless it is really important -- but this openness coupled with reasonable respect for each other's time is the culture of the school. Part of high school is learning how to advocate for oneself -- a life skill that carries over -- and they work on that a lot which, in turn , reduces stress. That said, there is no way around the fact that some students get stressed about tests, that kids with heavy course loads have a lot of homework, etc. -- especially junior year and senior year with college apps -- but the school is a big believer in the idea that kids -- even teenagers -- should want to come to school and enjoy their time there while they learn. Probably doesn't work for every single kid and certainly not every moment of every day all years, but I think the vast, vast. majority of students really like St. Andrews -- their teachers and their friends -- and that reduces stress. St. Andrew's believes that happy kids learn better - strange as that simple proposition may seem -- and actually work hard at that as a key principle that permeates the school. I don't mean to sound like a cheerleader, but this really is a core philosophy of the school and it has worked very well for my kids.

OP again - here's another example. Over on the MD school forum, there's a question about homework in high school: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/412045.page

On this thread, someone posted about a HS student having 5 tests in one day. This is EXACTLY what we hated about MCPS. The independent middle schools seem good about limiting the number of tests in one day (ours does not allow more than 2 per day). Are there similar limits/guidelines on number of tests per day even at the "pressure cooker" schools like Sidwell, GDS, etc?

Also, do the upper schools allow the kids to have PE every day, outdoor time, some breaks so that they are not eating lunch at 10:30 a.m. and then starving until 2:30 with only 5 minute breaks in between classes?

I think the factors below are what contribute to a high stress environment. This is really what we're trying to avoid. Is this something we have to be careful of even with independents, or are these problems unique to the local public schools?

- high pressure/high stakes testing, multiple tests (4 or more) on one day…
- stressed out teachers
- few or no breaks between classes a l a Advisory period or PE…do not want kid going for seven hours with only lunch and PE and 5 minutes between classes…

Thank you all!

I'm not so sure about Maret and St. Anselm's.

Hi PPs, this is OP. Thanks for all your input.

Does all the pressure at HS come from families and the kids themselves versus the staff? This would be the opposite of our experience in MCPS where the teachers are stressed about the high stakes testing. This is what really impacted our kid.

It seems that all of the independents do a great job in elementary and middle school of setting appropriate expectations, giving kids breaks, balance, etc….Does that fall off a cliff in HS with the exception of the schools you recommended? Or is the pressure mainly coming from the families and kids themselves rather than staff? Granted, I understand that HS is stressful. I'm just looking for a place where the staff/administration does not make it WORSE. Thanks!

Here is what I gathered from your input:
- Field
- Burke
- Bullis
- St. Andrew's
- St. Anselm's
- Maret

Thanks!

Having just been through HS and the college process, 11th and 12th grade really are tough at any school. Even if it is not one of the schools that seem to be pushing Ivy's, the testing, application process and waiting to hear results cna drive anyone bonkers.

Add in a tough academic schedule and it just makes it miserable.

Sports were actually a good thing. It gave my DC a release from all the pressure. It doesn't matter if you are not one of those families pushing for the ivy league. The college process is just tough. It is much different than when we went through it. Much more competitive, even for non ivy and top SLAC schools.

Finding the right school socially is as important. They need ot feel they have a group to hang out with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that there is really any school to avoid. There are only two schools (1 private and 1 public) around here that I regularly hear of that can be like a pressure cooker, both academically and socially at times, but even those two seems to have other positives that cause the kids to love those schools despite that. They are Langley and Holton. Since Holton is for chicks, you don't need to be concerned about that. Since Langley is public, you don't need to be concerned about that either, and those kids will thrive and lead.

What are you smoking, PP? Holton and Langley? ROTFLMAO

Well, MAYBE Holton for some and depending on the class but generally it's a nicer environment.

Sidwell, NCS, STA, and TJ, those are the pressure cookers. If you don't know this I really doubt your kids are part of the DC area pschool scene.

You forgot to mention Potomac, Maret, Landon and a host of other schools that are similarly pressure-cookers in US. You are the one sounding ignorant.

Bullis, Field, Burke, St. Andrew's, and to a lesser extent Maret and The Potomac School.

STA is a pressure cooker. So glad to be done with it.

We have a son who sounds like OP's and we like St. Anselms. It's a place with high expectations, true, but manages to maintain a collegial and collaborative atmosphere. And kind. A very very kind place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True! But if privates didn't tell this to students, maybe they wouldn't be able to field so many teams! (which, full disclosure, i find to be a dirty little secret of most privates)

Tell us more of your conspiracy theories!!!!

I was joking, but here is the serious point. Some kids love to play a sport and hope to play in college. Some love to play but aren't good enough for that. Many like to play, and some don't but do it because they think they have to. But most independents are set up to strongly incentivize - or require - kids to play on interscholastic teams. Good or bad, the time commitment is huge - one of our kids often wouldn't get home to eat and start homework until nearly 7:00 pm. Some kids are so organized and have the energy to do that, study well for another 4 or 5 hours, and do it again tomorrow. But many cannot, and school work suffers - not failing suffers, but the kid who should get the A gets a somewhat lower grade or learns to cram but not to mAster material. If the child is passionate about a team sport, fine, it is a trade off. But my thesis is that plenty of kids are hurt more than helped by the amount of time dedicated to school sports, and they are deluded into thinking this seriously helps in college admissions -- more than makes up for the loss of time spent om other pursuits -- if the student is not planning to play college ball.

All schools, even with required athletics, have lower time options (e.g. after school fitness classes or several times a week PE classes). I can see your point re: lack of time increasing anxiety but you in turn seem to be significantly underestimate the benefits (socially, physically, mentally) of regular exercise through interscholastic athletics. If you truly feel "the game is not worth the candle," so to speak, there are schools with no athletics requirement at all (but still with robust athletics participation).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True! But if privates didn't tell this to students, maybe they wouldn't be able to field so many teams! (which, full disclosure, i find to be a dirty little secret of most privates)

Tell us more of your conspiracy theories!!!!

I was joking, but here is the serious point. Some kids love to play a sport and hope to play in college. Some love to play but aren't good enough for that. Many like to play, and some don't but do it because they think they have to. But most independents are set up to strongly incentivize - or require - kids to play on interscholastic teams. Good or bad, the time commitment is huge - one of our kids often wouldn't get home to eat and start homework until nearly 7:00 pm. Some kids are so organized and have the energy to do that, study well for another 4 or 5 hours, and do it again tomorrow. But many cannot, and school work suffers - not failing suffers, but the kid who should get the A gets a somewhat lower grade or learns to cram but not to mAster material. If the child is passionate about a team sport, fine, it is a trade off. But my thesis is that plenty of kids are hurt more than helped by the amount of time dedicated to school sports, and they are deluded into thinking this seriously helps in college admissions -- more than makes up for the loss of time spent om other pursuits -- if the student is not planning to play college ball.

Hm, I'm not so sure. I have two very non-athletic kids who did some team sports because it was require and/or they wanted to give it a shot but they were never under the delusion that it would help them with college. I don't think any kids think simply showing up is enough.

Anonymous wrote:I graduated from St. Andrew's and would say that it fits what you are looking for. It was not a pressure cooker but there were rigorous opportunities for those who wanted them. Huge fan. Full disclosure, though. I graduated more than a decade ago.

+1. Current parent and this is still true. If anything, there are even more such opportunities today with the addition of more course choices. That said, for kids who seek the toughest challenges they will stillfeel some pressure junior/ senior year, but much of that Rises from the college app process itself.