Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dispelling several myths perpetrated on this forum:

1. Sidwell's tuition is the same as the other independent schools referenced in this thread. In many of the previous years, its increases have been below other privates. Before rushing to judgment on gouging, let's see what that others do under the circumstances.
2. Tuition increases have nothing to do with GDP or the stock market. They have everything to do with cost. The starting point for increase in cost is CPI. Many costs of operating a school have increased at significantly faster than CPI in the recent past, with benefits like healthcare being the prime example.
3. Until such time as parents / schools are willing to break from the orthodoxy of low student:teacher ratio, the cost of providing a private school education is necessarily going to increase at a faster rate than broader inflation indexes. This is because inflation indexes have a built-in productivity deflator (or as much as 1%) that keeps costs from rising as fast as they otherwise would.
4. Administrative salary increases have lagged increases in teacher pay, despite what is represented on this board.
5. The majority of FA dollars go to families making more than $100k, with a significant portion going to families with incomes above $200k.
6. The majority of FA dollars go to residents of the suburban counties and not the district itself.
7. The comments made on this particular board are exactly the same as the ones made in each of the previous 15 years. Nothing new here. Oddly, with each person who throws up his or her hands, broadcasting that they have given up and made a different choice, there seems to be another family stepping in.

The old tropes passed out.

Please -- look at the instance facilities build out. This is a cost bubble par excellence, and it's not driven by healthcare premiums -- why don't you play around with some numbers and dispel your own myth.

Anonymous wrote:Dispelling several myths perpetrated on this forum:

5. The majority of FA dollars go to families making more than $100k, with a significant portion going to families with incomes above $200k.
6. The majority of FA dollars go to residents of the suburban counties and not the district itself.

Anonymous wrote:Dispelling several myths perpetrated on this forum:

1. Sidwell's tuition is the same as the other independent schools referenced in this thread. In many of the previous years, its increases have been below other privates. Before rushing to judgment on gouging, let's see what that others do under the circumstances.
2. Tuition increases have nothing to do with GDP or the stock market. They have everything to do with cost. The starting point for increase in cost is CPI. Many costs of operating a school have increased at significantly faster than CPI in the recent past, with benefits like healthcare being the prime example.
3. Until such time as parents / schools are willing to break from the orthodoxy of low student:teacher ratio, the cost of providing a private school education is necessarily going to increase at a faster rate than broader inflation indexes. This is because inflation indexes have a built-in productivity deflator (or as much as 1%) that keeps costs from rising as fast as they otherwise would.
4. Administrative salary increases have lagged increases in teacher pay, despite what is represented on this board.
5. The majority of FA dollars go to families making more than $100k, with a significant portion going to families with incomes above $200k.
6. The majority of FA dollars go to residents of the suburban counties and not the district itself.
7. The comments made on this particular board are exactly the same as the ones made in each of the previous 15 years. Nothing new here. Oddly, with each person who throws up his or her hands, broadcasting that they have given up and made a different choice, there seems to be another family stepping in.

Anonymous wrote:Dispelling several myths perpetrated on this forum:

1. Sidwell's tuition is the same as the other independent schools referenced in this thread. In many of the previous years, its increases have been below other privates. Before rushing to judgment on gouging, let's see what that others do under the circumstances.
2. Tuition increases have nothing to do with GDP or the stock market. They have everything to do with cost. The starting point for increase in cost is CPI. Many costs of operating a school have increased at significantly faster than CPI in the recent past, with benefits like healthcare being the prime example.
3. Until such time as parents / schools are willing to break from the orthodoxy of low student:teacher ratio, the cost of providing a private school education is necessarily going to increase at a faster rate than broader inflation indexes. This is because inflation indexes have a built-in productivity deflator (or as much as 1%) that keeps costs from rising as fast as they otherwise would.
4. Administrative salary increases have lagged increases in teacher pay, despite what is represented on this board.
5. The majority of FA dollars go to families making more than $100k, with a significant portion going to families with incomes above $200k.
6. The majority of FA dollars go to residents of the suburban counties and not the district itself.
7. The comments made on this particular board are exactly the same as the ones made in each of the previous 15 years. Nothing new here. Oddly, with each person who throws up his or her hands, broadcasting that they have given up and made a different choice, there seems to be another family stepping in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is booming and Big Law draw are up. This increase will hardly be noticed by many parents.

Big law draws are up at the top end firms, but not necessarily elsewhere. Plus at many firms, there is an increasing divide in draws between big rain makers and everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:The stock market is booming and Big Law draw are up. This increase will hardly be noticed by many parents.

Anonymous wrote:Whitman Free
B-CC Free
Blair Free
TJ Free
WJ Free
Wooton Free
Churchill Free

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not read the entire thread but some pages. Quite a few PP said something like "can't afford then leave". As a Sidwell parent, I feel this type of expression is harmful to the Sidwell community. When we selected Sidwell over other schools several years ago, one of the important factors was the welcome feeling at Sidwell.

Our oldest entered SFS just as the building frenzy was ramping up. Our youngest is now a senior. Over that decade and a half the school culture has changed significantly and not for the better. The vibe is more ostentatious and smug. We're glad to be getting out now.

Anonymous wrote:I recently met a young DC family whose oldest child is not yet in elementary school, and yet they own a house for which they paid north of $5 million. It shows that there will always be families lining up to send their children to these schools, for whom increasing tuition is not an issue. I find it sort of depressing really, the pricing of certain incomes out of the private schools, but there it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

One solution is to decrease the huge financial aid budget. Currently SFS has $7 million annual FA budget; 23% of students receive FA and the average FA award is $ 26900. Certain amount of FA is good and necessary to attain the talents and maintain a diversified student body. But such a large amount the school currently gives out is not necessary, in particular when many full pay hard working families are struggling with the increase. I thnks the teachers deserve to receive good benefits and an increase in salary, but many families on FA do not deserve. SFS should have no issue to maintain a good diversified student body with significant cut to the FA budget.

The school has made diversity and particularly economic diversity a priority. Having a large FA pool reflects that value.

Good luck trying to change it.

Anonymous wrote:Most endowments pay out a certain percentage of their principal (say 4%) based on an average of its year-end amounts over a multi-year period (e.g., 4-5 years). They use this lookback approach so as to avoid paying out too much in a good year or too little after a bad one.

Also, a great deal of thinking has gone into the increasing tuition problem. Everyone can see it won’t end well. But I don’t know of schools that have solved the problem but through the creation of massive endowments and very successful annual fund campaigns. The world awaits she who finds another way.

Anonymous wrote:Our eldest graduated GDS and did not get into any of these schools. My youngest is at Walls and just go early admission to an Ivy. They both had similar test scores. Go figure.