Could anyone with experience on Beauvoir's sibling admission policy/record comment?

We have only applied to Beauvoir for my DC's sibling (we love the school and the logistics of having them in different school would be formidable), but I am increasingly getting worried that maybe we should apply elsewhere.

Thank you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems schools are in a very tough balancing act -- admit the siblings vs. admit the most qualified applicants. It works out best if the siblings ARE the most qualified, but unfortunately that doesn't always happen. No matter which side of the balance they favor, they will suffer lots of criticism.

I feel for the disappointed parents posting here too. It's sad there's no easy answer that makes everyone happy.

Not wanting to argue because you seem sincere but I can guarantee my sib was extremely qualified. Less qualified kids were admitted. This was not a case of underqualified sibling. I Kind of feel now that it was a rejection of the family even though they barely knew us. They knew other families better I suppose. Trust me, parents from the School dont believe me when I tell them kid was rejected. thye say it must have been a mistake . I dont explain that no it was definitely intentional. I know other people keep trying but it seemed pretty cruel to do that to dc.

You can guarantee your dc was "extremely qualified," but you can't guarantee there was not another extremely qualified applicant that was a better one for the school. Admissions committees are putting together a school community, not just admitting one student at a time.

Nope. You are wrong. Know my kid and the kids they accepted. They weren't building a community, they were addressing other interests of the school. Having nothing to do with the actual students or the "makeup of the class". Let's be vague and call them institutional interests. The institutional interests often trump best candidate status. Probably the right thing for the school to do in the short term but really silly thing to do long term.

You sound like another overbearing parent, claiming to know your kid and the other kids they accepted. Yeah, right!! If your child does not get in because they are not as good a fit or as good a candidate, denial is probably the least good way forward.

The other overbearing parent I know, whose child was rejected two times at the Top 3, said "Well, if they can't see the genius she is, they don't deserve her". Said child did not get into any other top private schools (unless someone counts Green Acres as a top school).

It happens all the time. I know of siblings who weren't accepted at Maret (3) and Sidwell (2). Sometimes they reapplied and were accepted, sometimes they went elsewhere. People shouldn't take it personally.

Hmm wonder why two posts would be deleted? I called 9:49 a troll and somehow that disappeared.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are being unduly harsh to the mom whose kid was rejected. So she's not phrasing her posts exactly right - back off, it must have been awful, especially to watch wealthy donor siblings sail in easily. Come on, we'd all be bitter and a bit raw if it/when it happened to us. And it is a bitter, raw truth that money speaks volumes at many schools.

She's not handling rejection with grace, no. Her posts speak volumes about her and the type of parent she is, which must come across at the school. She's so ungracious, brash, vindictive, accusatory in the worst way of the children who were admitted, it is no wonder that she is being criticized. And her obnxoxious statements in attempt to defend herself just make matters worse. She should shut her up. I think we get her point.

New Poster here. 9:49-- boy, aren't you defensive?

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are being unduly harsh to the mom whose kid was rejected. So she's not phrasing her posts exactly right - back off, it must have been awful, especially to watch wealthy donor siblings sail in easily. Come on, we'd all be bitter and a bit raw if it/when it happened to us. And it is a bitter, raw truth that money speaks volumes at many schools.

It did happen to some of us. It happened to me. I didn't react this way.

I don't see how it speaks volumes about the schools. I can imagine another parent whining because her child didn't get in but some other kid got in just because he was a sibling.

But I think you are the previous poster, as a sock puppet.

Anonymous wrote:I think you guys are being unduly harsh to the mom whose kid was rejected. So she's not phrasing her posts exactly right - back off, it must have been awful, especially to watch wealthy donor siblings sail in easily. Come on, we'd all be bitter and a bit raw if it/when it happened to us. And it is a bitter, raw truth that money speaks volumes at many schools.

She's not handling rejection with grace, no. Her posts speak volumes about her and the type of parent she is, which must come across at the school. She's so ungracious, brash, vindictive, accusatory in the worst way of the children who were admitted, it is no wonder that she is being criticized. And her obnxoxious statements in attempt to defend herself just make matters worse. She should shut her up. I think we get her point.

I think you guys are being unduly harsh to the mom whose kid was rejected. So she's not phrasing her posts exactly right - back off, it must have been awful, especially to watch wealthy donor siblings sail in easily. Come on, we'd all be bitter and a bit raw if it/when it happened to us. And it is a bitter, raw truth that money speaks volumes at many schools.

Very well said, pp.

To be fair, I imagine it is shocking for many parents to discover that their private school doesn't favor siblings. That's not the private-school culture that many of us knew growing up -- back in the day when people identified as strongly with their prep school as they did with their college. There's a tradeoff that schools like Sidwell have to make to achieve their super-elite academic status. What they gain in college placements they risk losing in alumni loyalty and tradition. My husband and I opted for the Catholic track because we wanted keep our girls together. There's a tradeoff to that as well -- Catholic schools (and most other schools that heavily favor siblings) tend to be less academically prestigious (well, at least to this crowd). Anyway my point is that if a strong sibling policy is important to you, factor that in at the front end and save yourself the grief. And be honest with yourself -- keeping your kids in the same school may be more important/practical than you may realize.

Anonymous wrote:17:21 Focus. This is about sibs not getting in to schools. You are pretty immature. We all know this happens and the OP is asking about. Contribute or move on.

No, I think 17:21 is right. That PP's posts ranting about how qualified her child was and how everyone else who got in was less qualified as well as "stoopid" and how she couldn't give a "sh*t" about the school now says a lot about her, by association, her family. They could very well be a family the school does not want to see more of, and being disliked by the school will hurt your child's chances of admission.

17:21 Focus. This is about sibs not getting in to schools. You are pretty immature. We all know this happens and the OP is asking about. Contribute or move on.

Burst out laughing!! The fact that my family is unhappy with the criteria that rejects a member of my family validates the criteria. Very funny and of course ridiculously self serving.
Which admission office do you work in by the way?
Look, I don't really give a sh#t about the school. Meaning I don't care about it. It is meaningless to me. I don't hate it or have any emotion toward the school. Which I think is not what the school wants. The school helped to create this attitude by pretending they accept the best and the brightest when they clearly don't. I clearly DO understand the school admission process as I brought up institutional interests and was being kind in not explicitly calling out stoopid rich kids, or mediocre legacies or politically connected dolts.

Wow, you just keep digging, don't you? I think they rejected your second child because they realized his mother is a dipshit. In retrospect, a better course would have been to boot your first child, so they'd be rid of you altogether.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems schools are in a very tough balancing act -- admit the siblings vs. admit the most qualified applicants. It works out best if the siblings ARE the most qualified, but unfortunately that doesn't always happen. No matter which side of the balance they favor, they will suffer lots of criticism.

I feel for the disappointed parents posting here too. It's sad there's no easy answer that makes everyone happy.

Not wanting to argue because you seem sincere but I can guarantee my sib was extremely qualified. Less qualified kids were admitted. This was not a case of underqualified sibling. I Kind of feel now that it was a rejection of the family even though they barely knew us. They knew other families better I suppose. Trust me, parents from the School dont believe me when I tell them kid was rejected. thye say it must have been a mistake . I dont explain that no it was definitely intentional. I know other people keep trying but it seemed pretty cruel to do that to dc.

OF COURSE he was qualified, and other weren't. Of course that was it.

Although I think you may be onto something there with the "rejection of the family" idea. Based on what little I know of you from this post, it seems perfectly logical to me.

This I know to be true about Maret (verrry small school) and GDS -- if your sibling/faculty applicant is a fine and excellent candidate, the school has been know in the past to tell you during admissions season, "Look, it can't happen this year. Probably __ grade. Keep Ian in his preschool another year / DCPS for prek & K. We just don't have the room, but we will."

For GDS, that often means "come in at K." For Maret, it has meant after K.

So in fact, these families with excellent candidate-not SN kids are being told "no," just as some PPs say. But they're not being told "never," they're being told "2nd grade, okay?"

It sounds nuanced but there's a big difference IMO.

and FWIW, a few years ago Sidwell told our family point blank, You should really wait until 4th.