I have to respectfully disagree — I do think it’s changed what is being taught and how it is taught.

The old curriculum was really rich and deep and had a lot of really great writers they no longer teach, including a number of Black ones. They didn’t expand what they teach so much as gut and replace it with new stuff that I find lightweight, or to be more charitable, less thought provoking than what they were teaching when we enrolled. My daughter and her friends complain about it all the time. They call one book they read about turtles and the power of indigenous women “The Dreck That Ruined Summer.”

I honestly don’t think I would have chosen it based on what it is now, but my daughter is old enough to make her own choices. She has good friends and is happy. After 7th, she knew she had a choice and looked at other places and decided to stay with her friends. She’s also a musician and truly loves the music department, which is totally top notch.

STEM people have different concerns, and I don’t know anything other than what I have already stated in previous posts, and it’s all second hand.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wrote the stuff about the math curriculum complaints, and my kid still is there, so —- yeah, not sure about the bullying.

FWIW, the school announced it was shifting emphasis and told the parents it was going to and then did, so that’s just…a fact?

Again, not a quant, but the parents complaining have the types of girls who might end up at MIT. One trying to apply out.

Also, equity practices have had an effect on math scores, and I know that because I read an article about how it played out in San Francisco, where the changes they made in the name of equity tanked test scores and widened the racial gap. It’s not some weird right wing conspiracy theory. It was in the NYTimes.

“Equity practices” and “shifting emphasis” - kind of a broad brush. It’s not a one size fits all thing. For STEM, I know there’s a debate about what age to start splitting people into different groups. That’s partly an equity question but not exclusively. I don’t think you’ll find that the high school curriculum is somehow weaker than it used to be.

Personally I’d didn’t love the parent DEI stuff when it was the outside consultants. But I never found myself doubting the quality of what was happening in the classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

well it appears that the last 1% posted on IG today. 61 girls. surprised at the Berkeley number and no Duke/Stanford/JHU is a bit surprising. There honestly isn't a bad school in this list.

7: Penn
6: Chicago, Cornell
5: Harvard
4: Princeton, Michigan
3: Berkeley
2: Brown, Columbia, Williams, WashU
1: Yale, Dartmouth, Northwestern, MIT, Vanderbilt, Emory, Rice, Tufts, Wellesley, Swarthmore, Barnard, Colgate, Wake Forest, Vassar, Northeastern, Chapman, Kenyon, Wesleyan

Extremely impressive and congrats to the seniors!

But maybe we can move onto more important questions, like how does this compare to Brearley?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

well it appears that the last 1% posted on IG today. 61 girls. surprised at the Berkeley number and no Duke/Stanford/JHU is a bit surprising. There honestly isn't a bad school in this list.

7: Penn
6: Chicago, Cornell
5: Harvard
4: Princeton, Michigan
3: Berkeley
2: Brown, Columbia, Williams, WashU
1: Yale, Dartmouth, Northwestern, MIT, Vanderbilt, Emory, Rice, Tufts, Wellesley, Swarthmore, Barnard, Colgate, Wake Forest, Vassar, Northeastern, Chapman, Kenyon, Wesleyan

I would take Baruch College (finance) or Stony Brook (CS) over many of the schools listed if you are looking to stay in NY Metro area.

Anonymous wrote:I wish I had done this. The difference between a Williams and a Kenyon is not worth the money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

As a Spence alum, I can vouch that it is very academically intense. Like, unpleasantly if it's not in your nature to study all the time on top of your other commitments. College and law school was easy after it.

oh for god's sake, just tell us how much your mommy and daddy paid to get you into college. because according to the experts here that's the only reason you got into the school you did.

Hahahaha I did something that no one here believes is good for ROI...took a full ride to a lesser regarded liberal arts college, graduated with zero debt, which then got me half tuition at a solid law school, and now I'm shockingly not failing at life--even though I've wasted too much time on this board. My mommy and daddy were not connected, nor wealthy, I was just decently intelligent, a hard worker, and somehow I did ok.

This is basically it. Send kid to Brearley and spend life savings. You will get her into a top college with sufficient name recognition only to see a single tear slowly roll down the left side of her face every time you mention Shakespeare.

Or save the money and be happy with one of these moderately less selective colleges that’s still full of rich connected New Yorkers and that leads to all the same life opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

well it appears that the last 1% posted on IG today. 61 girls. surprised at the Berkeley number and no Duke/Stanford/JHU is a bit surprising. There honestly isn't a bad school in this list.

7: Penn
6: Chicago, Cornell
5: Harvard
4: Princeton, Michigan
3: Berkeley
2: Brown, Columbia, Williams, WashU
1: Yale, Dartmouth, Northwestern, MIT, Vanderbilt, Emory, Rice, Tufts, Wellesley, Swarthmore, Barnard, Colgate, Wake Forest, Vassar, Northeastern, Chapman, Kenyon, Wesleyan

I wish I had done this. The difference between a Williams and a Kenyon is not worth the money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

As a Spence alum, I can vouch that it is very academically intense. Like, unpleasantly if it's not in your nature to study all the time on top of your other commitments. College and law school was easy after it.

oh for god's sake, just tell us how much your mommy and daddy paid to get you into college. because according to the experts here that's the only reason you got into the school you did.

Hahahaha I did something that no one here believes is good for ROI...took a full ride to a lesser regarded liberal arts college, graduated with zero debt, which then got me half tuition at a solid law school, and now I'm shockingly not failing at life--even though I've wasted too much time on this board. My mommy and daddy were not connected, nor wealthy, I was just decently intelligent, a hard worker, and somehow I did ok.

Anonymous wrote:You clearly don’t know many people whose children are at these TT schools. There are two types of UES dinner parties, those where people endlessly complain about these places and tell dark, dark stories about them or those where they sit around and talk about how great they are for sending their kids to these places.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is sort of blood omertà among certain parents at these TT schools that they are indeed always everything they were promised to be and that anyone who feels different is just jealous. It’s weird and immature, and it means admin is never held accountable for anything other than getting rich kids into HYP, which isn’t a metric of anything other than getting rich kids into HYP. How do they once there, do they do well once they graduate? No one knows, because you aren’t allowed to ask. I didn’t quite believe there adults who believed in HYP the way kids believe in Santa Claus, but then my kid went to a TT. There are.

Feels like the majority of people are happy with the outcomes for TT and the demand for the product is still there.

If the bullying and poor outcomes were more consistently an issue - people would not be applying.

your daughter and a couple of others had a terrible experience due to one rich girl at one TT school. It sucks but it sure seems to be an outlier.

Well, both dinner parties sound exhausting.

Our daughter is at Spence. Her friends are a diversity group of girls. Most are dual income affluent households. The girls are nice and the parents are friendly but we don't hang out with them often.

Are there things we don't like, of course, no school is perfect. But thankfully we aren't experiencing bullying/mean girl stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is sort of blood omertà among certain parents at these TT schools that they are indeed always everything they were promised to be and that anyone who feels different is just jealous. It’s weird and immature, and it means admin is never held accountable for anything other than getting rich kids into HYP, which isn’t a metric of anything other than getting rich kids into HYP. How do they once there, do they do well once they graduate? No one knows, because you aren’t allowed to ask. I didn’t quite believe there adults who believed in HYP the way kids believe in Santa Claus, but then my kid went to a TT. There are.

Feels like the majority of people are happy with the outcomes for TT and the demand for the product is still there.

If the bullying and poor outcomes were more consistently an issue - people would not be applying.

your daughter and a couple of others had a terrible experience due to one rich girl at one TT school. It sucks but it sure seems to be an outlier.

Think Dalton, Spence and Brearley parents are happy this year. HM and Trinity parents less so.

Anonymous wrote:I wrote the stuff about the math curriculum complaints, and my kid still is there, so —- yeah, not sure about the bullying.

FWIW, the school announced it was shifting emphasis and told the parents it was going to and then did, so that’s just…a fact?

Again, not a quant, but the parents complaining have the types of girls who might end up at MIT. One trying to apply out.

Also, equity practices have had an effect on math scores, and I know that because I read an article about how it played out in San Francisco, where the changes they made in the name of equity tanked test scores and widened the racial gap. It’s not some weird right wing conspiracy theory. It was in the NYTimes.

“Equity practices” and “shifting emphasis” - kind of a broad brush. It’s not a one size fits all thing. For STEM, I know there’s a debate about what age to start splitting people into different groups. That’s partly an equity question but not exclusively. I don’t think you’ll find that the high school curriculum is somehow weaker than it used to be.

Personally I’d didn’t love the parent DEI stuff when it was the outside consultants. But I never found myself doubting the quality of what was happening in the classroom.

You clearly don’t know many people whose children are at these TT schools. There are two types of UES dinner parties, those where people endlessly complain about these places and tell dark, dark stories about them or those where they sit around and talk about how great they are for sending their kids to these places.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is sort of blood omertà among certain parents at these TT schools that they are indeed always everything they were promised to be and that anyone who feels different is just jealous. It’s weird and immature, and it means admin is never held accountable for anything other than getting rich kids into HYP, which isn’t a metric of anything other than getting rich kids into HYP. How do they once there, do they do well once they graduate? No one knows, because you aren’t allowed to ask. I didn’t quite believe there adults who believed in HYP the way kids believe in Santa Claus, but then my kid went to a TT. There are.

Feels like the majority of people are happy with the outcomes for TT and the demand for the product is still there.

If the bullying and poor outcomes were more consistently an issue - people would not be applying.

your daughter and a couple of others had a terrible experience due to one rich girl at one TT school. It sucks but it sure seems to be an outlier.

I wrote the stuff about the math curriculum complaints, and my kid still is there, so —- yeah, not sure about the bullying.

FWIW, the school announced it was shifting emphasis and told the parents it was going to and then did, so that’s just…a fact?

Again, not a quant, but the parents complaining have the types of girls who might end up at MIT. One trying to apply out.

Also, equity practices have had an effect on math scores, and I know that because I read an article about how it played out in San Francisco, where the changes they made in the name of equity tanked test scores and widened the racial gap. It’s not some weird right wing conspiracy theory. It was in the NYTimes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I meant was they have changed a lot in recent years and I don’t know how it has or hasn’t changed the way math is taught because I am not a quant. The parents who complained to me have a high schooler they didn’t know was eligible for all sorts of programs due to how good at math she was. The other was a middle schooler whose parents felt like she was bored in the advanced track. I’d love it if the focus in the humanities was on close reading complicated texts like Shakespeare, but they have shifted focus.

Shifted focus in what way?

Please don't get her started again. Just search Brearley in the search function. She has posted dozens of times about how the school's focus on DEI has shifted it away from a great books curriculum to DEI focused junk. She has been hurt badly by the school in ways you can read about in her many other posts, but we don't need to rehash them every time the school is mentioned on a thread.

AHA - got it. Well those are two entirely different things. They have diversified the syllabus, but it's all top notch authors and all super rigorous. It's actually better than it used to be. If someone knowledgeable wants to quibble go ahead, but the criticism you typically hear is of the lazy, racist, I don't know actually know what I'm talking about variety.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I meant was they have changed a lot in recent years and I don’t know how it has or hasn’t changed the way math is taught because I am not a quant. The parents who complained to me have a high schooler they didn’t know was eligible for all sorts of programs due to how good at math she was. The other was a middle schooler whose parents felt like she was bored in the advanced track. I’d love it if the focus in the humanities was on close reading complicated texts like Shakespeare, but they have shifted focus.

Shifted focus in what way?

Please don't get her started again. Just search Brearley in the search function. She has posted dozens of times about how the school's focus on DEI has shifted it away from a great books curriculum to DEI focused junk. She has been hurt badly by the school in ways you can read about in her many other posts, but we don't need to rehash them every time the school is mentioned on a thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

As a Spence alum, I can vouch that it is very academically intense. Like, unpleasantly if it's not in your nature to study all the time on top of your other commitments. College and law school was easy after it.

oh for god's sake, just tell us how much your mommy and daddy paid to get you into college. because according to the experts here that's the only reason you got into the school you did.

Hahahaha I did something that no one here believes is good for ROI...took a full ride to a lesser regarded liberal arts college, graduated with zero debt, which then got me half tuition at a solid law school, and now I'm shockingly not failing at life--even though I've wasted too much time on this board. My mommy and daddy were not connected, nor wealthy, I was just decently intelligent, a hard worker, and somehow I did ok.

My spouse did the same as you. No regrets. Really helps if you want to go to Grad school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Brearley parent. Year after year about 25% of class goes to HYPS. With those in particular, it is a lot of legacy, but plenty of normal legacies. Only about 1/3 maybe get into their early schools so most of what you see is not legacy. Plenty of fancy families but plenty of regular families

Other kid went to a different TT with great results as well but not quite the same.

Honestly, I can’t explain why colleges love Brearley so much. But I can say that these results are not reducible to hooks, which are common at all these schools. It plays a role, but the unhooked are doing fine as well.

i can't really explain it either with respect to Spence. The results are out of this world. I understand some of it is $$. But the broad based number of excellent schools across almost the entire student body says that it has to be something.

So far, Spence has 60 kids posted on Instagram which is probably their 99% or entire of the total senior population. the IVY+ Stanford+ MIT rate is 47%.. this is insane as i would think Spence is not as academically intense as Brearley or HM...

As a Spence alum, I can vouch that it is very academically intense. Like, unpleasantly if it's not in your nature to study all the time on top of your other commitments. College and law school was easy after it.

oh for god's sake, just tell us how much your mommy and daddy paid to get you into college. because according to the experts here that's the only reason you got into the school you did.

Hahahaha I did something that no one here believes is good for ROI...took a full ride to a lesser regarded liberal arts college, graduated with zero debt, which then got me half tuition at a solid law school, and now I'm shockingly not failing at life--even though I've wasted too much time on this board. My mommy and daddy were not connected, nor wealthy, I was just decently intelligent, a hard worker, and somehow I did ok.