Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be a same sex multi racial.couple.

This one doesn't make any sense. These people usually face discrimination.

Not in DC. Unlike other parts of the US, the ultra-educated crowd couldn't: care a wit who someone loves or who they are sleeping with. It is a status symbol to have those types of friends in the NWDC crowd.

I totally know what you mean. But I live on a nice street in upper nw and no one is like that. Pretty much all of my neighbors are basic couples many with kids of all ages, a deal of diversity, AA, a few Asians, but mostly white lawyers and finance or business types. I always wonder where the fascinating people live. Closer to downtown? What do you think?

I think the point was, it's the relative scarcity of same-sex multi-racial couples, in combination with the fact that school admission staff see them as really desirable, that makes them such a shoe-in for admission.

Did no one see that episode of Modern Family where cam and Mitch became aware they could get into the elite private preschool b/c they were a gay couple with an Asian adopted child? Elite schools love all that "diversity". They were a shoo-in...until the adopted African boy with the lesbian parents (one of which was in a wheelchair) showed up. One up-ed on the diversity!

Forgot to mention the lesbian couple was racially mixed as well.

All of this is become a major bore (eye rolling). Let's just say no AA or other minorities, gays, disabled, etc, were interested in applying to Sidwell and assume that it was all white (WASP) with all white (WASP) applicants and your white DC didn't get in. Then who in the hell would you blame? Of course, I'm sure some would far reach to assess blame. This thread has had enough (eye rolling).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be a same sex multi racial.couple.

This one doesn't make any sense. These people usually face discrimination.

Not in DC. Unlike other parts of the US, the ultra-educated crowd couldn't: care a wit who someone loves or who they are sleeping with. It is a status symbol to have those types of friends in the NWDC crowd.

I totally know what you mean. But I live on a nice street in upper nw and no one is like that. Pretty much all of my neighbors are basic couples many with kids of all ages, a deal of diversity, AA, a few Asians, but mostly white lawyers and finance or business types. I always wonder where the fascinating people live. Closer to downtown? What do you think?

I think the point was, it's the relative scarcity of same-sex multi-racial couples, in combination with the fact that school admission staff see them as really desirable, that makes them such a shoe-in for admission.

Did no one see that episode of Modern Family where cam and Mitch became aware they could get into the elite private preschool b/c they were a gay couple with an Asian adopted child? Elite schools love all that "diversity". They were a shoo-in...until the adopted African boy with the lesbian parents (one of which was in a wheelchair) showed up. One up-ed on the diversity!

Forgot to mention the lesbian couple was racially mixed as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Be a same sex multi racial.couple.

This one doesn't make any sense. These people usually face discrimination.

Not in DC. Unlike other parts of the US, the ultra-educated crowd couldn't: care a wit who someone loves or who they are sleeping with. It is a status symbol to have those types of friends in the NWDC crowd.

I totally know what you mean. But I live on a nice street in upper nw and no one is like that. Pretty much all of my neighbors are basic couples many with kids of all ages, a deal of diversity, AA, a few Asians, but mostly white lawyers and finance or business types. I always wonder where the fascinating people live. Closer to downtown? What do you think?

I think the point was, it's the relative scarcity of same-sex multi-racial couples, in combination with the fact that school admission staff see them as really desirable, that makes them such a shoe-in for admission.

Did no one see that episode of Modern Family where cam and Mitch became aware they could get into the elite private preschool b/c they were a gay couple with an Asian adopted child? Elite schools love all that "diversity". They were a shoo-in...until the adopted African boy with the lesbian parents (one of which was in a wheelchiar) showed up. One up-ed on the diversity!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, all institutions change, and, yes, Sidwell is a good, though not perfect, school (if you find the perfect one, please LMK :)). But, how has the school changed? I know when I talk to alums from the '60s they have very happy memories of a place that was less self-reverential with a culture of more humility and humor. Is that your experience? I wonder if there's any way for Sidwell to get that back, at least a little bit.

The country , and Washington in particular, has changed a lot since the 1960's ( far more self-reverential now) and the school of choice for the elite shows this in its full glory. For example, Sidwell would have never chosen to build that new gym the US has in the 60's. It is a gym that benefits an NFL team for one of the least athletci schools in the area. Perhaps then, people would have used an application and fund raising boom to keep tuition down or fund home mortages for teachers, FA for teacer's kids etc... These are old school values.

Not a Sidwell parent here, but a few points. First, nobody was building facilities like that in the 1960s in independent schools. It is well documented that there's a bit of a facilities arms race going on. With area schools like NCS, Georgetown Prep, Bullis, Episcopal, Holton, and Landon having impressive athletic facilities, it is not suprising that Sidwell, a city school that needs to maximize its field space, went underground and built a beautiful new facility. Rightly or wrongly, they will probably get a few more student-athletes because a nice facility is seen as physical evidence of a solid commitment to athletics (and athletics at Sidwell are co-curricular, I believe, as opposed to being treated as just extra-curricular). I was recently on Sidwell's campus for a function open to the wider community, and it looks like they also have a beautiful arts facility and they also have a wonderful Meeting House for Quaker Meeting. So it's not like they are blowing off everything else for the sports.

By way of comparison, friends at St. Albans tell me that, now that the big academic building renovation is done, the school is undertaking a renovation of the fields to try to reclaim more land/organize their playing fields better to use the space. Very pricey, I'm sure, but sports are co-curricular there as well and the reality is that a St. Albans doesn't want to lose kids to Bullis/Episcopal/Landon/Prep just because an athletically oriented kid sees the acres of suburban fields at the other IAC schools and thinks STA is not the place for him.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, all institutions change, and, yes, Sidwell is a good, though not perfect, school (if you find the perfect one, please LMK :)). But, how has the school changed? I know when I talk to alums from the '60s they have very happy memories of a place that was less self-reverential with a culture of more humility and humor. Is that your experience? I wonder if there's any way for Sidwell to get that back, at least a little bit.

The country , and Washington in particular, has changed a lot since the 1960's ( far more self-reverential now) and the school of choice for the elite shows this in its full glory. For example, Sidwell would have never chosen to build that new gym the US has in the 60's. It is a gym that benefits an NFL team for one of the least athletci schools in the area. Perhaps then, people would have used an application and fund raising boom to keep tuition down or fund home mortages for teachers, FA for teacer's kids etc... These are old school values.

Yes, all institutions change, and, yes, Sidwell is a good, though not perfect, school (if you find the perfect one, please LMK ). But, how has the school changed? I know when I talk to alums from the '60s they have very happy memories of a place that was less self-reverential with a culture of more humility and humor. Is that your experience? I wonder if there's any way for Sidwell to get that back, at least a little bit.

It has both changed (as any institution can evolve) and is still terrific. As a PP noted, it isn't a perfect school, but it is very good, and there are many very good schools, both public and private, in the area.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Sidwell alum and this thread makes me sad.

How so? I know many alums say the school has changed tremendously, but others, particularly those who are current parents as well as alums seem quite enthusiastic about what they see at Sidwell today.

I'm a Sidwell alum and this thread makes me sad.

OP here. does anyone know the odds of getting into pre-k if you are not a sibling?

Anonymous wrote:

I'm kidding -- like most of the PPs on this thread. Actually, he came in at 7th and was a Democrat then, but Sidwell turned him into a Republican -- this part I'm not kidding about.

For OP and anyone who is taking this thread seriously, I would say there are so many qualified and appealing kids who apply that it mostly comes down to luck -- that was certainly true with our son. If you're applying to schools it helps to keep that in mind -- and to remember as well that Sidwell isn't perfect -- it's a good school, but there are many other good schools - public and private -- in this area.

PP here. I must be getting old(er). I can't tell the difference between sarcasm/satire and serious posting anymore.