Wish all schools offered interviews. SJC didn't. Not only are interviews great for the kids, but it really helps us parents to better understand the school.

Sorry, on iPhone. I have no idea how "clearly conveyed" became "Clara conveyed."

I actually did not mind the parent essays. My DC is shy and does not do a great job demonstrating his strengths in interviews, so I appreciated having the opportunity to try to convey why I think he's a truly special kid. I just saw it as an opportunity to tell them things I thought might not get Clara conveyed in any other way.

Anonymous wrote:We did the shadow days at schools that offered them. Our DC loved the shadow days and the three schools with shadow days (of the 5 we applied to) are DC's 1st-3rd choices. From what we heard from DC, Landon really did a great job (or had a great kid be our DC's shadow buddy), or both. There was one school that had a shadow day where DC couldn't recall the name of the buddy -- they obviously didn't connect in the same way as at Landon -- but still enjoyed it thanks to the collective kids being super-friendly and teachers being welcoming too.

Hated, hated, hated having to do the parent application essays. Gad-zooks, what a pain.

Definitely liked having a tour of the school and classrooms with just parents. Felt more at ease and more likely to ask questions. Moreover, the commentary by our tour guide was noticeably different than the tours on which kids came along (in the latter case, much of the commentary was directed to the kids).

We did, too, and came away increasingly annoyed at schools that don't offer shadow days until the kids are accepted.

Anonymous wrote:We did the shadow days at schools that offered them. Our DC loved the shadow days and the three schools with shadow days (of the 5 we applied to) are DC's 1st-3rd choices. From what we heard from DC, Landon really did a great job (or had a great kid be our DC's shadow buddy), or both. There was one school that had a shadow day where DC couldn't recall the name of the buddy -- they obviously didn't connect in the same way as at Landon -- but still enjoyed it thanks to the collective kids being super-friendly and teachers being welcoming too.

Hated, hated, hated having to do the parent application essays. Gad-zooks, what a pain.

Definitely liked having a tour of the school and classrooms with just parents. Felt more at ease and more likely to ask questions. Moreover, the commentary by our tour guide was noticeably different than the tours on which kids came along (in the latter case, much of the commentary was directed to the kids).

+1

I really wish all schools would do away with these, even the seemingly simple "tell us about your child." But I suppose they separate out the people who really want their kid to get in, and thus invest the time in them, from the only marginally interested.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, "smug", "self-righteous", "awful attitude", and "incredibly off putting" are some of the same phrases I'd use to describe the PP who posted 18:25-18:34. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.

It is indeed in the eye of the beholder. But this is a thread about personal experiences with admissions offices, so how about adding your experiences with the admissions process, if you have any, rather than trashing other posters? If you had personal experiences with the schools they mention and came away with different views, I'm sure readers would find that much more helpful than a post about other posters.

My problem with your posts is that they are not constructive at all. OP asked for constructive criticism and suggestions for how schools can improve. Your responses are vague and subjective complaints, which don't help anyone. Offer more specific and constructive criticism; make specific suggestions for how schools can change their approach. If all you have is complaints about what you thought was a smug attitude, and thinly veiled brags about how your "gifted" child is "thriving," you're not adding anything useful to the discussion.

I found those posts helpful, PP, particularly since that is not the first time I have heard people say similar things about Sidwell and GDS. Seems to me their admissions offices should be aware that some people get such negative impressions. They can always ignore the feedback if they think it's unjustified. I'm not sure in any case how the other PPs can get more specific when describing impressions and attitudes. Coldness or smugness are communicated through subtle things such as tone and expression.

But anyway, please dont hijack an interesting thread by complaining about other people's posts. It's boring.

I will offer some feedback on SSSAS. I went to the open house with low expectations, since SSSAS does not have a great reputation among people I know: viewed as snooty and country clubby. I was very pleasantly surprised by how enthusiastic, diverse and warm the teacher and staff seemed to be, as well as how thoughtful they were about teaching methods. They also had some great activities for the kids to engage in -- a science thing, for instance. I came away thinking the school seems like a much more interesting place than k had originally assumed.

Anonymous wrote:GDS. Looked at the lower school. Admissions staff came off as self-righteous and smug. I'm very lefty by any standards but I found the self-satisfied PC vibe incredibly off-putting. Withdrew my kid's application.

Had a 100% completely different experience. I found the admissions staff to be extremely helpful, polite and professional. Our parent interview with the AD made the school go from our third choice to our top choice.

We did the shadow days at schools that offered them. Our DC loved the shadow days and the three schools with shadow days (of the 5 we applied to) are DC's 1st-3rd choices. From what we heard from DC, Landon really did a great job (or had a great kid be our DC's shadow buddy), or both. There was one school that had a shadow day where DC couldn't recall the name of the buddy -- they obviously didn't connect in the same way as at Landon -- but still enjoyed it thanks to the collective kids being super-friendly and teachers being welcoming too.

Hated, hated, hated having to do the parent application essays. Gad-zooks, what a pain.

Definitely liked having a tour of the school and classrooms with just parents. Felt more at ease and more likely to ask questions. Moreover, the commentary by our tour guide was noticeably different than the tours on which kids came along (in the latter case, much of the commentary was directed to the kids).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, "smug", "self-righteous", "awful attitude", and "incredibly off putting" are some of the same phrases I'd use to describe the PP who posted 18:25-18:34. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.

It is indeed in the eye of the beholder. But this is a thread about personal experiences with admissions offices, so how about adding your experiences with the admissions process, if you have any, rather than trashing other posters? If you had personal experiences with the schools they mention and came away with different views, I'm sure readers would find that much more helpful than a post about other posters.

My problem with your posts is that they are not constructive at all. OP asked for constructive criticism and suggestions for how schools can improve. Your responses are vague and subjective complaints, which don't help anyone. Offer more specific and constructive criticism; make specific suggestions for how schools can change their approach. If all you have is complaints about what you thought was a smug attitude, and thinly veiled brags about how your "gifted" child is "thriving," you're not adding anything useful to the discussion.

Ummm... as one of the posters you don't like - not the one with the gifted child - please realize that these posts are by different people, not by a single poster as you seem to assume. And, you know, if you want more details you could just ask nicely.... happy to provide it, to the extent that I can do so without offering up personally identifiable information.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DC had a similar experiences at Field: host wasn't nasty, just seemed uninterested and fobbed DC off on another kid at lunchtime. I felt bad for DC but wasn't sure how much to blame the school (as opposed to thinking: ok, DC got stuck with a dud).

But I guess it did leave me thinking that schools should try to do a better job of selecting and "training" kids who will host visitors. When a child visits and has an unfriendly or just distracted/uninterested host, they can feel very shut out and end up feeling negative about the school. Field was DC's top choice after the open house but bottom choice after that not-so-good visit.

,
2032 posting again. This is a good example of a constructive post IMHO. It complains about the school, but it offers a specific step the school can take to prevent the problem in the future.

Agreed. Our child had a great host a Field; would want everyone's experience to be in the range of the same.

Anonymous wrote:Our DC had a similar experiences at Field: host wasn't nasty, just seemed uninterested and fobbed DC off on another kid at lunchtime. I felt bad for DC but wasn't sure how much to blame the school (as opposed to thinking: ok, DC got stuck with a dud).

But I guess it did leave me thinking that schools should try to do a better job of selecting and "training" kids who will host visitors. When a child visits and has an unfriendly or just distracted/uninterested host, they can feel very shut out and end up feeling negative about the school. Field was DC's top choice after the open house but bottom choice after that not-so-good visit.

,
2032 posting again. This is a good example of a constructive post IMHO. It complains about the school, but it offers a specific step the school can take to prevent the problem in the future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, "smug", "self-righteous", "awful attitude", and "incredibly off putting" are some of the same phrases I'd use to describe the PP who posted 18:25-18:34. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.

It is indeed in the eye of the beholder. But this is a thread about personal experiences with admissions offices, so how about adding your experiences with the admissions process, if you have any, rather than trashing other posters? If you had personal experiences with the schools they mention and came away with different views, I'm sure readers would find that much more helpful than a post about other posters.

My problem with your posts is that they are not constructive at all. OP asked for constructive criticism and suggestions for how schools can improve. Your responses are vague and subjective complaints, which don't help anyone. Offer more specific and constructive criticism; make specific suggestions for how schools can change their approach. If all you have is complaints about what you thought was a smug attitude, and thinly veiled brags about how your "gifted" child is "thriving," you're not adding anything useful to the discussion.

Anonymous wrote: If any admissions officers are reading this thread, I assume most of them will react by laughing and having a glass of wine.

I don't think so. Maybe I'm naive, but I think most admissions staff truly want to be welcoming and make the process as painless as possible for families. I don't know if any admissions staff will actually read this, but if they do I hope they will take to heart both the things applicants appreciate and the things they hate.

Our DC had a similar experiences at Field: host wasn't nasty, just seemed uninterested and fobbed DC off on another kid at lunchtime. I felt bad for DC but wasn't sure how much to blame the school (as opposed to thinking: ok, DC got stuck with a dud).

But I guess it did leave me thinking that schools should try to do a better job of selecting and "training" kids who will host visitors. When a child visits and has an unfriendly or just distracted/uninterested host, they can feel very shut out and end up feeling negative about the school. Field was DC's top choice after the open house but bottom choice after that not-so-good visit.

If any admissions officers are reading this thread, I assume most of them will react by laughing and having a glass of wine.