Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-orders-halt-to-a-private-schools-construction-amid-questions-about-permits/2019/02/27/6d1d99da-3acc-11e9-aaae-69364b2ed137_story.html?utm_term=.f2700bb81aa3

No DC permits for construction?

Yes, I am excited to let my kids be in a building that hasn't been approved or inspected.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-orders-halt-to-a-private-schools-construction-amid-questions-about-permits/2019/02/27/6d1d99da-3acc-11e9-aaae-69364b2ed137_story.html?utm_term=.f2700bb81aa3

No DC permits for construction?

Anonymous wrote:For the person who keeps yelling "PRESIDENT OF YALE!" He was not the greatest president of Yale the University ever had:

https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/14/magazine/the-yale-schmidt-leaves-behind.html

The Chinese government influence of a private school based in the United States is something I think people should be more concerned about then what I'm reading here. You certainly wouldn't be able to communicate with your friends in the PRC based schools over Facebook, Twitter or Instagram because those are banned in China.

And any collaborative research projects between students at each school won't have access to the same information. Censored information isn't something I'd expect from a private school in the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much misinformation in this thread. If you want to know the model and motivation, go to the school’s promotion center at Mazza. They are very upfront - their goal is to create a Chinese/US partnership program where US families who want to be ready for cultural fluidity and integration are studying side by side with students from Chinese families willing to pay top dollar for the American education model. In terms of what US families would be interested - the characterization that only blind affluence or misfits would be interested is categorically wrong. We’ve had very open conversations with them about our rising 9th grader. True, they hope to attract the affluent looking for the international exposure, but it quickly became apparent to us they are also looking to incentivize families with strong students to help them start with strong class profiles. Ours is an entrepreneurial family and we know a good deal when we see it. For the strong US candidates Whittle is offering the same quality as the elites at negotiable rates in the form of incentive funding of American students to build the brand and attract the foreign investment. It’s not a done deal for us and we are applying to the elites but also giving Whittle serious consideration. Folks, stop conjecturing from ignorance, go talk to them...

So they are offering to charge you less than $51,000 to send your kid there? Face it, anyone who has a choice to do Whittle and Sidwell, with its longstanding Chinese Studies and Chinese Language programs that has exchanges with schools in Shanghai and Beijing and has summer programs in Shanghai and in the rural areas and is full pay isn't sending their kid to be "the first" at a new, for profit school run by Whittle, if Chinese is the main priority. I suppose I can see it if your kid got into another school that didn't have the Chinese opportunities and it is a priority.

Spoken like a true member of the socio economic status quo, whether from multi generational family wealth or a traditional professional path through the elite secondary and/or college route. There are plenty of families who generate their wealth through entrepreneurial activities who understand the new economy can veer from traditional routes. Whittle predecessor Avenues has forged a respectable reputation in NYC with qualified and quantifiable results. Admittedly the for profit structure isn’t for traditionalists and does have a bad wrap because of substandard post secondary education models but for those of us who are entrepreneurial we know it’s possible to work out the kinks of the model and the quality of folks who are engaged these newest models are exceptional.

As a result, we have affluent Chinese families willing to pay top dollar for the American teaching model carried out by exceptional faculty from top schools and universities. In the process local families can benefit from subsidized quality education because they need to lower the cost threshold to attract local talent from skeptical families. I put my self-generated dollars where I know I can get the greatest return. If I can provide my child with a similar quality education at Whittle at half the cost of an “elite” with an already demonstrated from Avenue similar deliverable of quality at the other end, I’d be a fool to pas up the opportunity. I understand it’s hard to accept the new economy and investing in a named elite is a comfortable choice. Time will tell if it’s a mediocre choice as well...

Anonymous wrote:Another leader was the chancellor of BERKLY. And another one was CEO of BOEING OF INDIA. And another leader went to EXETER!

Anonymous wrote:Another leader was the chancellor of BERKLY. And another one was CEO of BOEING OF INDIA. And another leader went to EXETER!

Anonymous wrote:Another leader was the chancellor of BERKLY. And another one was CEO of BOEING OF INDIA. And another leader went to EXETER!

Anonymous wrote:For the person who keeps yelling "PRESIDENT OF YALE!" He was not the greatest president of Yale the University ever had:

https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/14/magazine/the-yale-schmidt-leaves-behind.html

The Chinese government influence of a private school based in the United States is something I think people should be more concerned about then what I'm reading here. You certainly wouldn't be able to communicate with your friends in the PRC based schools over Facebook, Twitter or Instagram because those are banned in China.

And any collaborative research projects between students at each school won't have access to the same information. Censored information isn't something I'd expect from a private school in the US.