So does GDS.

And at which schools do teachers provide "appropriate assignments that build critical thinking skills and encourage an interest in learning"?


Sidwell does this.

To 12/07/2009 00:06

Interesting and valuable observaions.
Could you be more specific to make your observations truly useful for others?

Interesting idea, but what school would allow you to do that?

And at which schools do teachers provide "appropriate assignments that build critical thinking skills and encourage an interest in learning"?

How can you leave us dangling like this??!!

(Continued form the above post written by Tutor) Oh forgot, if you really want to compare the academics of each school, then maybe you should take a week and mirror a student in your child's grade at each school of interest. You will have first hand knowledge of the school.

I am a tutor and I have tutored students at GDS, St. Albans, NCS, Landon, Maret, Field School, Bullis and Gonzaga. I think that many people are making comments based on 2nd and 3rd hand opinions. At least my opinion is based on years of working with students at each of these schools.

While it may seem appealing to describe a school's overall academic level, it is an accurate metric. Secondary schools - just like colleges - have departments with varying degrees of effectiveness, rigor, etc. I know that certain schools are very strong in math, weaker in science or amazingly successful in English.

Next, what is your measure of academic effectiveness? Does it mean that a school gives too much homework every night only to encourage students to cram information to pass a test only to forget shortly thereafter? Or does it mean teachers provide appropriate assignments that build critical thinking skills and encourage an interest in learning? It seems that many parents confuse rigor with hw, tests, etc.

I attempt to be brief, but this thread is disturbing to me. Another thing that I observe is parents hire tutors. This is great for me, but what about the child? Sometimes parents are so pressed to get this “academic rigor”, and despite the fact that their child is not at the level, the parent will hire tutors to help their child succeed. Parents are artificially raising the rigor of private schools because professional tutors are essentially writing essays, research papers, etc.

All in all, the idea of ranking is ridiculous when considered in a vacuum. Parents need to really think about the needs of their child, the strengths and weaknesses of their child, the culture of the school, the class ratio, etc.

I know that this is the real world and at the end of the day students will apply for college and therefore need to appear competitive by attending a competitive school. But wouldn’t it be nice if parents were concerned with something more meaningful than "ranking”?

Anonymous wrote:One clarification on the current head at Bullis who will move to Sidwell next year; he was the head at Westown School (PA), another Quaker school, for 12 yrs before becoming head at Bullis 8 yrs ago.

Didn't know about the intervening gig. He was at Sidwell for 10+ years before Westown.

14:59 clearly knows what she's talking about. My kid did a club sport and her school got mad at her because she did the club sport in lieu of the h.s. team. Yes, she was recruited to an Ivy and yes, the private school took credit even though they made my kid's life hell for her daring to switch to a competent team.

One clarification on the current head at Bullis who will move to Sidwell next year; he was the head at Westown School (PA), another Quaker school, for 12 yrs before becoming head at Bullis 8 yrs ago.

The head of Bullis came from Sidwell and is going back. Arguably the process says more about Bullis's respect for Sidwell (we'll promote someone from Sidwell who has never headed a school) than vice versa. Sidwell gets a somewhat seasoned Head and an insider out of the deal. Sort of a free trial/audition.

The two things I looked at wrt teachers were longevity and control over curricular innovation. Basically, I wanted teachers who stayed put because they were happy and had control over what and how they taught. But I also wanted teachers who were themselves lifelong learners rather than people who just did the same old same old year after year.

OK, now we all know that the head of Bullis is moving to Sidwell next year.

But how much mobility there is among teachers across these and other schools?

In fact, is there any difference between the teachers/faculty, say, at Bullis or Landon, and those at Georgetown Day, Maret or Potomac?

Is it possible to say that one school has better teachers than the other? Any examples or insights to share?

Do the schools use different criteria in hiring teachers?

Do teachers have their own ranking regarding the school they would like to teach most?

In the end, any school is only as good as its teachers are. Reputation and rankings do not reveal much about the performance of teachers in class/school.

Anonymous wrote:Hard to say how to rank the schools academcially or otherwise.

In my own ranking, I would put at the top those schools that gently push, encourage and give space to each kid to fully develop his/her potential in all areas (academics, athletics, arts, ...)... and if the schools discover a "serious talent" in any of the areas, they are able to open the door (make the contacts/links) to its full realization.

Are any of the schools around here able to do this? Or is it too much to ask for $30,000 a year?

Yes and no. I think that all of the schools encourage kids to follow their potential, and provide opportunities to do so, to a point.

But, whether they will have contacts or links beyond the school itself is hit or miss - an interested teacher might help a kid make a contact, or know of an opportunity, but another kid with a different interest will be out of luck.

And, all the schools I know of generally feel that their programs should take precedence. So, for example, if you are a nationally ranked athlete you can opt out of PE at Sidwell, but if you play a club sport, you still have to do PE or a team at school. And, I know of very few schools that will say, Oh, you have a tournament this weekend, why don't you just skip your homework!

PP -- yes many of the schools in this area prep many different sorts of kids for academic, athletic, musical, dramatic, etc. excellence.

Hard to say how to rank the schools academcially or otherwise.

In my own ranking, I would put at the top those schools that gently push, encourage and give space to each kid to fully develop his/her potential in all areas (academics, athletics, arts, ...)... and if the schools discover a "serious talent" in any of the areas, they are able to open the door (make the contacts/links) to its full realization.

Are any of the schools around here able to do this? Or is it too much to ask for $30,000 a year?

re how can you assess academic challenge? Coursework (# of APs, assignments in cases where you can get access to them) and test scores (% NM commended and semifinalist; median SAT) would be a good start. All of these are imperfect measures, but with some sleuthing, most are publicly available.

College admissions stats are trickier both because of legacies and athletes and because one kid can be the source of multiple admissions. Matriculation stats would be more helpful, especially if you focus on the least prestigious colleges recent alumns went to rather than the most prestigious ones.