Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed about the hype. I think they've gotten crazier bc of the Obama girls and the competitiveness of education in general. When I was in high school 15 years ago (outing myself as an old timer), Sidwell tried to recruit me but I stayed in the local public (MoCo)

ha, funny, Who is on this board, 23 year olds?

No kidding. I was in high school almost 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

A statement completely lacking in perspective and humility. Sorry that the crunchy do-gooders are now outnumbered by members of the commercial class. The fact is that the DC metro area is a much different place demographically than it was in years "of old".

Your fellow parents, ladies and gentlemen!
- Sidwell grad who'd never consider sending my kids there

Get off your high horse and take off your sepia toned glasses. Your Sidwell was tattered, less diverse, poorly endowed and more self righteous. I know of a few schools in Philadelphia that still meet this description...and they are all on the verge of extinction.

Further, it is the height of arrogance to suggest that people who work in commercial enterprises are somehow less good or less worthy.

Arrogance extends to characterization of them as "less interested and less cultured".

If you think Sidwell is legitimately diverse, I have a bridge to sell you.

And, I assume you know this if you know anything at all about the history of the school, but speaking in a derogatory manner about 'crunchy do-gooders' doesn't endear you.

Anonymous wrote:Once again I feel like it's necessary to tell any non-Sidwell parents that DCUM discussions don't resemble actual life at the school.

Agree

Once again I feel like it's necessary to tell any non-Sidwell parents that DCUM discussions don't resemble actual life at the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

A statement completely lacking in perspective and humility. Sorry that the crunchy do-gooders are now outnumbered by members of the commercial class. The fact is that the DC metro area is a much different place demographically than it was in years "of old".

Your fellow parents, ladies and gentlemen!
- Sidwell grad who'd never consider sending my kids there

Get off your high horse and take off your sepia toned glasses. Your Sidwell was tattered, less diverse, poorly endowed and more self righteous. I know of a few schools in Philadelphia that still meet this description...and they are all on the verge of extinction.

Further, it is the height of arrogance to suggest that people who work in commercial enterprises are somehow less good or less worthy.

Arrogance extends to characterization of them as "less interested and less cultured".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

A statement completely lacking in perspective and humility. Sorry that the crunchy do-gooders are now outnumbered by members of the commercial class. The fact is that the DC metro area is a much different place demographically than it was in years "of old".

Your fellow parents, ladies and gentlemen!
- Sidwell grad who'd never consider sending my kids there

Get off your high horse and take off your sepia toned glasses. Your Sidwell was tattered, less diverse, poorly endowed and more self righteous. I know of a few schools in Philadelphia that still meet this description...and they are all on the verge of extinction.

Further, it is the height of arrogance to suggest that people who work in commercial enterprises are somehow less good or less worthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

A statement completely lacking in perspective and humility. Sorry that the crunchy do-gooders are now outnumbered by members of the commercial class. The fact is that the DC metro area is a much different place demographically than it was in years "of old".

Your fellow parents, ladies and gentlemen!
- Sidwell grad who'd never consider sending my kids there

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

A statement completely lacking in perspective and humility. Sorry that the crunchy do-gooders are now outnumbered by members of the commercial class. The fact is that the DC metro area is a much different place demographically than it was in years "of old".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

This is true. Many, many people want it for the social climbing aspect.
- Mid 90s Sidwell grad who saw the change when Chelsea came

Oh, that change started much earlier when Teddy Roosevelt's kid went there. It was completely down to earth before then, but then almost overnight, it was full of those pre-War social climbers. And once the Nixon girls decided to attend in the '60s, it really went to the dogs. Yes, the slide to mediocrity began a long time ago. It's just so sad that it took over 100 years for someone to notice it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

The point is that the parents used to be interested and cultured. Now they're social climbers. One of the K dads a year ago was 80 years old! Come on.

It's "cachet" not "cache".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

And, the Sidwell Friends of old was segregated. What is your point? The world has changed and so should institutions.

Anonymous wrote:
It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.


The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

I am a Sidwell parent at the LS with two kids there (one boy, one girl). I agree wholeheartedly with this list and these are the primary reasons we decided on Sidwell. I also disagree with the people who consider the school to be humorless. The kids there are very kind, very sweet and well behaved children and they also have a lot of fun. (I am sure this is the way it is at most schools). I see this both within the school and at playdates. But at the end of the day, it's not particularly helpful for you to question other people's choices. Simply make the best one for you and your child. It will all work out well if that's the focus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got popular when Chelsea went there, and then when the Obama girls went there. This city is full of a$$ kissers, and people wanted to be there just to be able to say they send their kids to school with the president's kids.

The city is full of:

1. Highly educated parents who want the best education money can buy
2. Families with progressive attitudes
3. Families not interested in an overly religious educational experience
4. Students / parents not interested in single sex education
5. Families living in areas with lower quality public options
6. Upper middle class AA families who don't care for the limited diversity offered in their publics school (e.g. Whitman is 4% AA)
7. Students who thrive in a more intimate setting than larger schools provide
8. Parents desirous of a school that seeks to develop the whole child

I am not saying that social climbers are absent from the community. Nor am I saying that Sidwell is unique in being able to offer these attributes. But, reducing the many and varied reasons to a stupid axiom speaks only to your ignorance.

The Sidwell (or "Friends" as it used to be called) families of old see a major difference. Trust me.

Anonymous wrote:Agreed about the hype. I think they've gotten crazier bc of the Obama girls and the competitiveness of education in general. When I was in high school 15 years ago (outing myself as an old timer), Sidwell tried to recruit me but I stayed in the local public (MoCo)

ha, funny, Who is on this board, 23 year olds?