I live next to Langley HS and my kids should go to Langley HS but they are NOT.  They are attending Potomac School, not far from Langley HS.  I am sure Langley HS is one of the top public schools in Virginia but it is not Potomac.  My kids just happen to like Potomac better than Langley HS.

Anonymous wrote:Shrewd consumers or greedy selfish parents?

What do you think of people worrying about what other people do? A My dh went to a public school and his parents were wealthy. The school was in a very good school district and fit him very well. So, I wouldn't call them greedy or selfish. I suppose shrewd consumers would be closer but, honestly i don't think they did it because it didn't cost anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I send my kids to public schools because the kids are more competitive there, and I like that.

+1. I think the public schools in the DMV suburbs are better than the private schools for what I’m looking for re: education for my kids. YMMV.

Former teacher: overall, you’ll get a better education in public school in this area, especially in math.

My guess is the OP sends her kids to private and thinks private is far superior. She’s 100% wrong. I saw dozens and dozens of kids come from private to public, including being a part of team meetings where these kids were discussed. Almost all had gaps in their knowledge.

+2, here is Austin public schools are better than Private. Most UMC folks I know send their kids to public with no expenses spared for enrichment activities ( tutoring, top notch camps, 1:1 private lessons for music, sports). They also have some sort of household help, so kids don't have to spend a ton of their spare time helping with mowing, household chores etc and can actually spend time on academic and extra-curriculars. Some chores are required in our home, but I find their time is better spent on studying for math competitions and piano practice. With 1:1 tutoring, kids don't have to follow school curriculum so they can delve into their areas of interest.

And we spend quite a bit of time with our kids making sure they are engaged in school, help them when needed when they are stuck in math or provide personal feedback on their essays. Especially if the Public school teacher is not able to provide individualized feedback.

And yes we take mid priced vacations to Europe/Caribbean every year. HHI: ~700K and our home is $1.5M (on the higher side for Austin) and yes we do have two Tesla's! Save a ton for retirement and 529. Mid 40's

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see anything wrong with this. What I do have an issue with, and this is not common but it does happen: extremely frugal and stingy parents. To the point of not providing their childrens needs because they do not want to spend money

We are suuuuuper frugal but it runs in favor of our kids always. Like we don't go out to eat almost ever and take cheap vacations and never buy new clothes or furniture so that we can afford to make sure our kids can participate in activities and have high quality childcare and we can afford quality shoes and winter coats for them. I think sometimes our friends get annoyed at our frugality because it's inconvenient to them -- they want us to join them for an expensive vacation house rental or spend a bunch of money on some random and potentially not even fun weekend activity, and we'll decline because we want to be able to afford piano lessons for DD. As I always tel my DH, "It's no one else's business how we choose to spend our money."

But one reason we are like this is because my parents were the opposite plus had way more disposable income. Like my parents refused to to let me participate in certain HS sports because of cost even though I was talented and committed, but then my dad would blow hundreds of dollars on tickets to an NFL game and then forget to go. They are very selfish people who had kids and then resented spending any money on us at all. I always vowed I'd be the opposite when I had kids.

Before you congratulate yourself too much…Lesson for you. Extremes not good. You are on the opposite side likely denying your kids
a good experience and/or opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see anything wrong with this. What I do have an issue with, and this is not common but it does happen: extremely frugal and stingy parents. To the point of not providing their childrens needs because they do not want to spend money

We are suuuuuper frugal but it runs in favor of our kids always. Like we don't go out to eat almost ever and take cheap vacations and never buy new clothes or furniture so that we can afford to make sure our kids can participate in activities and have high quality childcare and we can afford quality shoes and winter coats for them. I think sometimes our friends get annoyed at our frugality because it's inconvenient to them -- they want us to join them for an expensive vacation house rental or spend a bunch of money on some random and potentially not even fun weekend activity, and we'll decline because we want to be able to afford piano lessons for DD. As I always tel my DH, "It's no one else's business how we choose to spend our money."

But one reason we are like this is because my parents were the opposite plus had way more disposable income. Like my parents refused to to let me participate in certain HS sports because of cost even though I was talented and committed, but then my dad would blow hundreds of dollars on tickets to an NFL game and then forget to go. They are very selfish people who had kids and then resented spending any money on us at all. I always vowed I'd be the opposite when I had kids.

Anonymous wrote:OP I will be the outlier here and say that when kids are in top rated districts but have 30+ in a class with no aide and their parents can *easily* afford to get them out there…I totally think they should.

That doesn’t mean they need to go to Beauvoir with all the status obsession. Far from it. But put your kids in a learning environment in which you yourself would want to spend 7 hours a day. Calm, functional and imbued with respect.

Funny. I am the product of 13 years of private school, and I put my kids in public precisely because that is not the environment in which I want them to spend 7 hours a day. And I know I'm not the only one who feels this way

Here's a thought I'd only ever share here, but it goes in this thread:

I sometimes feel very resentful of UMC parents in DC who lottery into very desirable schools when they could afford to either move IB for a good school or send their kids to private. We aren't wealthy and have no choice but public, and can barely afford to live IB for a mediocre DCPS. We've also struck out on the lottery every single year.

I get why people do it -- everyone wants what is best for their kid and if what's best is free, all the better.

But the upshot is that we subsidize things like language immersion, IB programs, Montessori, and other desirable things for kids whose parents have the means to pay for this stuff on their own, while many many MC and poor families are stuck at mediocre or failing public schools. It's a weird fly in the ointment of DC's supposed commitment to "equity". I know some charters are trying to fix this by offering spots to low income families exclusively, but this doesn't help a family like ours that can't afford a quality IB school or private, but is not poor enough to qualify for a designated spot at a charter.

When we meet wealthy people whose kids attend schools like Stokes or LAMB, I privately think to myself how messed up it is that I am helping pay for their kids to learn to speak Spanish or French and get a priority feed to DCI, while my own kid attends a struggling elementary school with a horrible MS/HS feed. Especially because I know if they had not won the lottery, they would absolutely be sending their kids to private school -- they'd never send their child to my school. It just feels weird.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am literally stunned by people who don’t understand this:

Whether your kid will succeed or not is based on you (and their DNA).

Like straight up. So so many people in the Ivy League are from public school. I really don’t know why people think private school will make a mediocre kid something special.

Much of what ends up being financial success depends on connections. I’m a product of independent schools and then graduated from NYU. I got excellent internships through my network and then all of my subsequent jobs. I don’t think people who haven’t lived in these circles have even the vaguest understanding of this concept. I CAN send my kids to an expensive independent school and they do start life in 3rd base because that’s what my DH and I had. Does anyone here actually think my kids will have to grind it out to find a great internship at one of the big 3? When your kid is hanging out at the home of a MBB partner for years on end and your vacationing at each other’s summer homes what do you think happens when they need a solid? It’s no accident that there are a ton is social events hosted through the independent schools.I’m reality these are networking events.

why do you assume this only happens in private?

I’m not that poster, but nobody said that. If you can’t understand how peer groups can help lead to success I don’t know what to tell ya.

I don’t see anything wrong with this. What I do have an issue with, and this is not common but it does happen: extremely frugal and stingy parents. To the point of not providing their childrens needs because they do not want to spend money

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am literally stunned by people who don’t understand this:

Whether your kid will succeed or not is based on you (and their DNA).

Like straight up. So so many people in the Ivy League are from public school. I really don’t know why people think private school will make a mediocre kid something special.

Much of what ends up being financial success depends on connections. I’m a product of independent schools and then graduated from NYU. I got excellent internships through my network and then all of my subsequent jobs. I don’t think people who haven’t lived in these circles have even the vaguest understanding of this concept. I CAN send my kids to an expensive independent school and they do start life in 3rd base because that’s what my DH and I had. Does anyone here actually think my kids will have to grind it out to find a great internship at one of the big 3? When your kid is hanging out at the home of a MBB partner for years on end and your vacationing at each other’s summer homes what do you think happens when they need a solid? It’s no accident that there are a ton is social events hosted through the independent schools.I’m reality these are networking events.

why do you assume this only happens in private?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I will be the outlier here and say that when kids are in top rated districts but have 30+ in a class with no aide and their parents can *easily* afford to get them out there…I totally think they should.

That doesn’t mean they need to go to Beauvoir with all the status obsession. Far from it. But put your kids in a learning environment in which you yourself would want to spend 7 hours a day. Calm, functional and imbued with respect.

I have the same thoughts. I don’t understand why you wouldn’t send your kids to private if you could afford it. Sure, they can get a quality education in public, but the experience is much better overall in private.

what a dumb comment.

Expensive is relative, and there are some great public schools in our area. Moronic thread.

Anonymous wrote:I am literally stunned by people who don’t understand this:

Whether your kid will succeed or not is based on you (and their DNA).

Like straight up. So so many people in the Ivy League are from public school. I really don’t know why people think private school will make a mediocre kid something special.

Yes, but the experience at private is generally all around better than the public school experience. These parents obviously appreciate the experience of nicer things or they wouldn’t be driving luxury cars.

Anonymous wrote:I am literally stunned by people who don’t understand this:

Whether your kid will succeed or not is based on you (and their DNA).

Like straight up. So so many people in the Ivy League are from public school. I really don’t know why people think private school will make a mediocre kid something special.

I agree with you. But we just want a different learning experience for our kids than the hectic environment of Deal and Wilson. Not everyone who sends their kids to private school is doing so to breed success or to guarantee a specific college admission.

Anonymous wrote:My experience in NOVA is that three types go to private: 1) the people who want prestige. They’re shooting for the very best privates; 2) the people whose kids “need more attention.” They’re oftentimes at mediocre and parochial schools; 3) the people who want their kid on a HS sports team. Their kid can’t get on the local HS team, but the private coach will make room for them. Typically, these are mediocre and parochial schools.

This is also my experience. In our close friends' case it is because of competitive sports.