Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Wouldn’t tuition increases have cut these families from all school across the board? Unless you’re saying that Friends is less expensive than the others. In that case the economic downturn could go both ways for it.

The other schools have more affluent families than Friends, as a whole. That's long been the case.

How could you possibly know that? Those numbers aren’t ever available.

The kids I’ve seen from Friends always seem to have the most lovely way of talking with other adults and kids — just so present and friendly. I’ve always chalked that up to the Quaker emphasis on community. I was surprised by how posh it was when I visited. I guess I had been expecting more Quaker simplicity but it was in some ways the most luxurious.

I have heard that their endowment is smaller than other schools, maybe second to Bryn Mawr. But that would suggest to me that other places can give more financial aid. Size of endowment also depends on when they started the fund.

You spend enough time around the Baltimore privates and you pick things up. Plenty of Friends parents have said this to me directly. I don't think there's any study to find the average incomes at X school and compare it to Y school, but you can use soft factors to make a reasonable judgement. Friends parents aren't poor, certainly! But it's never had the level of wealth to the extent you can find at Gilman or McDonogh. The school also has a smaller endowment and the overall facilities aren't quite as nice as at the other schools. None of this is a criticism for Friends is a very good school, but it does tend to fill a niche just as the other schools do. And many Friends families like it this way and specifically chose the school for this reason.

1) Anecdata isn't data. You have no way of knowing about other people's wealth -- income is only one piece of it, and sometimes the least important for families who inherit.
2) Does anyone know that school endowment correlates to the wealth of the families at the school? PP's point about financial aid seems relevant here, insofar as the more resources the school has, the more it can support non-full pay students.
3) What do you mean about the facilities?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Wouldn’t tuition increases have cut these families from all school across the board? Unless you’re saying that Friends is less expensive than the others. In that case the economic downturn could go both ways for it.

The other schools have more affluent families than Friends, as a whole. That's long been the case.

How could you possibly know that? Those numbers aren’t ever available.

The kids I’ve seen from Friends always seem to have the most lovely way of talking with other adults and kids — just so present and friendly. I’ve always chalked that up to the Quaker emphasis on community. I was surprised by how posh it was when I visited. I guess I had been expecting more Quaker simplicity but it was in some ways the most luxurious.

I have heard that their endowment is smaller than other schools, maybe second to Bryn Mawr. But that would suggest to me that other places can give more financial aid. Size of endowment also depends on when they started the fund.

You spend enough time around the Baltimore privates and you pick things up. Plenty of Friends parents have said this to me directly. I don't think there's any study to find the average incomes at X school and compare it to Y school, but you can use soft factors to make a reasonable judgement. Friends parents aren't poor, certainly! But it's never had the level of wealth to the extent you can find at Gilman or McDonogh. The school also has a smaller endowment and the overall facilities aren't quite as nice as at the other schools. None of this is a criticism for Friends is a very good school, but it does tend to fill a niche just as the other schools do. And many Friends families like it this way and specifically chose the school for this reason.

Anonymous wrote:Can we call it ‘private schools’ and not ‘privates’? Because ‘privates’ usually means sex organs.
Though maybe this is sarcasm, yes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Wouldn’t tuition increases have cut these families from all school across the board? Unless you’re saying that Friends is less expensive than the others. In that case the economic downturn could go both ways for it.

The other schools have more affluent families than Friends, as a whole. That's long been the case.

How could you possibly know that? Those numbers aren’t ever available.

The kids I’ve seen from Friends always seem to have the most lovely way of talking with other adults and kids — just so present and friendly. I’ve always chalked that up to the Quaker emphasis on community. I was surprised by how posh it was when I visited. I guess I had been expecting more Quaker simplicity but it was in some ways the most luxurious.

I have heard that their endowment is smaller than other schools, maybe second to Bryn Mawr. But that would suggest to me that other places can give more financial aid. Size of endowment also depends on when they started the fund.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Wouldn’t tuition increases have cut these families from all school across the board? Unless you’re saying that Friends is less expensive than the others. In that case the economic downturn could go both ways for it.

The other schools have more affluent families than Friends, as a whole. That's long been the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Wouldn’t tuition increases have cut these families from all school across the board? Unless you’re saying that Friends is less expensive than the others. In that case the economic downturn could go both ways for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?

10-20 years ago Friends used to get a lot of bright students from families who were highly educated but didn't have big incomes but who could manage to swing the tuition. Academics, non-profit administrators, social workers, similar occupations. But many of those kids are now going to the top programs at City/Poly, or Towson, as the tuition increases have priced them out of private schools. I am not implying the student body is weaker but my observation is that the top cohort who would have ratcheted up the Ivy and top LAC admission numbers is smaller as a consequence. Friends used to have comparable college placement and SAT scores with Gilman and Park but it's now slightly behind. At the same time I don't think the "bottom" of the class is weaker than in the past. Rather there are perhaps a few more kids admitted at the bottom end and the middle of the pack is bigger. Great news if your kid is middle of the pack!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Baltimore and are considering privates for our girls. It would be nice if the many knowledgable posters here could go over the options. Thank you!

What grades? Religious or secular? Co-ed or single sex? Any particular extra curricular needs or wants? Any concerns with learning or behavior issues or support? Any geographical constraints?

Nothing is going to beat visiting the schools though. Also consider approaching it with an open mind. I wasn't going to consider single-sex to begin with, but that would have been a mistake for one of my children.

To be honest, we were looking at Bryn Mawr as a top choice but this is based on online research only. This is for HS - we are not there yet. Religious is ok, I guess, we really haven't thought about it (we are atheists but not aggressively so). Co-ed and single-sex are both fine. No behavioral issues so far.

Bryn Mawr is an excellent school. It has a reputation as being competitive, and my observation would back that up. I do not have a child there. I have friends who have children there or have had children there. A Bryn Mawr girl is going to get an excellent education. I'd recommend visiting, and have her do the visiting day - and do it more than once if she needs to to get a feel for it. Bryn Mawr is part of the tri-school consortium, so your daughter will have the opportunity to take classes at Gilman (boys) or RPCS (girls) as well. Bridges connect the schools so it's safe and easy for the kids to go to the different campuses. The tri-school consortium means that while your daughter will have her home school as her school, she'll have access to a much broader array of classes and experiences if she should want them. Something that's a concern for many when they consider private schools and the necessarily more limited courses or opportunities when compared to what the huge public schools can offer. Bryn Mawr has great academics and arts. Kids who are more focused on athletics seem to be ending up at McDonogh these days.

RPCS is also an excellent school, and has a reputation for being a bit more nurturing than Bryn Mawr. One of the concerns I've encountered is how a child entering in high school will do at these K-12 schools, and my observation is that the kids welcome the new kids. The classes expand quite a bit for upper school, and the lifers are eager to meet new kids. And upper school brings a lot more freedoms and responsibilities, and the new kids fit right in. The schools do a good job of working to integrate everyone into a cohesive class. RPCS tends to be ranked slightly below Bryn Mawr when it comes to test scores, so if you have a highly competitive academically focused kid Bryn Mawr might be a better fit. On the other hand, with the ability to take classes at all 3 schools, your child will be challenged. I love the Latin program at Gilman, although Bryn Mawr girls tend to stay on their own campus for latin.

Friends is also right near Gilman, Bryn Mawr, and RPCS. It does not share classes with the other 3, but the kids can all be found after school on each other's campuses or at the Starbucks. My observation is that Friends is an open, welcoming school. They are focused on the whole-child, and have great opportunities for the arts. It seems like Friends might be slightly easier for a child to get into lately, but I'm basing that entirely on anecdotes. I wouldn't assume admission is guaranteed at any of these schools, even with excellent scores, recommendations, visits, etc.

St. Pauls School for Girls I'm not very familiar with. I understand that the Boys and Girls schools are merging under one umbrella. The St. Pauls kids I know are nice kids, but all boys.

McDonogh is a lovely school, but it feels big to me. They have amazing athletics programs, good arts and good academics. It's in the county so it's somewhat apart. Like Park, they have transportation through the school, rather than through the Kangaroo Coach, if you're looking at transportation. McDonogh has in the past had a reputation of being the school where you went if you didn't get into Gilman/Bryn Mawr, but that is not my experience. The children I know there are top notch; some say there's been too much focus on athletics in recent years.

Park is different. If Friends is a more casual version of the traditional privates, Park wrote its own rules. You've seen the back and forth here already, but if you have a child who needs the ability to go deep and far in math, Park is your school. If you have a kid who wouldn't just rebel against uniforms, but argue they're a tool for caging the mind, body, and spirit, check out Park. If you have a kid who might need some encouragement, or might have a tendency to fly under the radar, Park might not be the best fit, depending. But I think you should visit, even if you're mostly considering more traditional schools like Bryn Mawr.

IND and NDP, both catholic, are excellent schools as well. I have the impression that IND is the more academic, and NDP the more athletic, of the two. But I know great girls at both.

None of these schools are a shoe-in for getting in. I know kids who get shut out every year, even applying to 3 or 4 schools. I know kids who took a few application cycles to get into the school they really wanted. If you visit Bryn Mawr, and walk away knowing Bryn Mawr is the right school for your daughter, you may not want to wait to apply for 9th grade. If there are openings, kids start in 7th and 8th, when they know what they want for HS. Sometimes going through the application process in 8th and not getting in can light a fire under a child for the 9th grade admissions cycle.

If you're in the city, there are also some great public schools. The kids at City and Poly also interact with the Friends/Gilman/Bryn Mawr/RPCS/Boys Latin kids. My observation is they're getting a solid education and there are some really great opportunities available to them - check out the JHU Baltimore Scholars program. BSA is also a one of a kind opportunity. I know children who have left all of the above schools over the years for the experience they could get at BSA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very familiar with the Baltimore schools.

If we're talking about Gilman, Friends and Park, this is how they're positioned on the scale of personality, from preppy to artsy/liberal: Gilman (all boys, historically prestigious, the #1 school for Baltimore's establishment), Friends (middle of the road, popular among JHU academics, progressive but grounded) and then Park (strong curriculum, faculty called by their first name, very liberal and progressive, perhaps too much, historically the #1 school for elite Jews in Baltimore although that's weakened somewhat with many now sending kids to Gilman/Bryn Mawr).

I've heard more than a few people say that Friends is the best public school education money can buy, and there's truth to it. The atmosphere at Friends is comparable to the atmosphere at good public schools in affluent in-town suburbs with a high percentage of educated parents in the academics / medicine / non profits. As such Friends is popular with parents who find the traditional prep school atmosphere off-putting because they went to public schools themselves, but who find Park too unstructured/hippy.

On the flip side, other parents might question why paying 30k for something that may not feel inherently special or unique. Friends is a happy school with good academics, but may feel like it's missing that special touch one might expect from a private school, and which Park and Gilman have albeit for quite different reasons.

Academically, in terms of college placements, Gilman and Park have the edge. Friends used to be comparable but has weakened in the last decade, not because of any decline in faculty or teaching but slight changes to the student body demographics. But a bright kid won't be hurt.

It's well worth visiting all three schools and paying close attention to the campus vibes and students. Faculty are great at all three. Based on what you've said about your son I would suspect he'd lean towards Park and Friends over Gilman, but definitely don't rule Gilman out.

Can you please go into more detail?