Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

Nah. Sidwell tuition is squarely in line with the tuition of other K-12 Quaker schools that are located *within the city limits* of large East Coast cities. Particularly NYC, Philly, Providence and Baltimore. Baltimore Friends is somewhat less, but of course so are Baltimore homes, salaries, everything. Same for Wilmington Friends, in a city that I just learned from the interwebs is 51% less expensive of a city to live in than Washington DC

I hope you're not thinking of the practically rural SSFS as your point of comparison?

Exactly right. None of these supposedly Quaker schools are actually Quaker. They like to tout their values but their price tags tell the true story. No true Quaker would believe that over $50k/year is in line with the Quaker values of simplicity and care for the Earth. It’s marketing and it works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to a “top 2” school in a city with two such schools and I’m really confused by what “social climbing” is supposed to mean here. The social life is a bunch of frumpy moms and dad-bod dads with *mostly* similar incomes/wealth to us. It’s not like I’m getting an invitation to yacht with MacKenzie Bezos out of this. Maybe in NYC or LA this would lead to a better/cooler social life but not so much in a city like DC or the city where I am.

Dear, you're not really part of this discussion

NP. Why? Too close to the truth? Not everyone is foaming at the mouth to have a Senator’s grandchild or a second tier hedge fund manager’s progeny in their class. It’s not like LA where my friend had Kerry Washington’s kid in her kid’s class.

Other than a few exceptions, most people who apply to private apply to these + beauvoir/sta/NCS. Why? It's not worth the money otherwise

Can you elaborate? What specifically at BVR is worth tuition that isn't possible at Sheridan/StPats/NPS/Langley/Lowell?

Is it the faculty, the curriculum, the physical space ...

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to a “top 2” school in a city with two such schools and I’m really confused by what “social climbing” is supposed to mean here. The social life is a bunch of frumpy moms and dad-bod dads with *mostly* similar incomes/wealth to us. It’s not like I’m getting an invitation to yacht with MacKenzie Bezos out of this. Maybe in NYC or LA this would lead to a better/cooler social life but not so much in a city like DC or the city where I am.

Dear, you're not really part of this discussion

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

Nah. Sidwell tuition is squarely in line with the tuition of other K-12 Quaker schools that are located *within the city limits* of large East Coast cities. Particularly NYC, Philly, Providence and Baltimore. Baltimore Friends is somewhat less, but of course so are Baltimore homes, salaries, everything. Same for Wilmington Friends, in a city that I just learned from the interwebs is 51% less expensive of a city to live in than Washington DC

I hope you're not thinking of the practically rural SSFS as your point of comparison?

My kids go to a “top 2” school in a city with two such schools and I’m really confused by what “social climbing” is supposed to mean here. The social life is a bunch of frumpy moms and dad-bod dads with *mostly* similar incomes/wealth to us. It’s not like I’m getting an invitation to yacht with MacKenzie Bezos out of this. Maybe in NYC or LA this would lead to a better/cooler social life but not so much in a city like DC or the city where I am.

Anonymous wrote:The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Curious to hear more, if you’re willing to say more. Was the religiousness at all a factor? Maybe we’re outliers, but we found SFS far more religious than we were expecting. And even when it wasn’t religious, we felt like “quaker values” got pulled out anytime anyone disagreed with someone or disliked someone—not dissimilar to “regular” religion Relatedly, our oldest kid hasn’t really enjoyed themselves, but we’re giving it a bit longer. We though some of this came from the quakerism, which kind of put a somberness on everything.

Anyway, we would love to hear more, as we’re struggling with the long-term decision here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could this seriously be an educational decision for elementary school or is it just pure social climbing strategy?

Maybe more like lack of imagination/ intellectual laziness Coupled with rigid ideas of what high quality education looks like.

There are so many good options in this area and there is no guarantee that all bright, wealthy (or poorer) students will be happy or thrive at schools with the highest snob value.

Are you an Asst AD at a lower tier private under pressure for her job or what ?

Anonymous wrote:Because their kids is bright, they are rich, and for some reason or another they aren't applying to cathedral schools.

Other than a few exceptions, most people who apply to private apply to these + beauvoir/sta/NCS. Why? It's not worth the money otherwise

Maybe these are just the only Private schools they think is worth it and they are also doing the charter and out of bounds DCPS lottery ?

And tuition is now squarely 45-50 K a year - it hasn’t been in the 30’s for 10 years .

Can someone please explain to me what acceptance rates have to do with quality of education?

The list in the title was exactly our list for a while. We were not interested in STA/Cathedral or other religious schools, and SFS did not seem religious in the same way. Silent meeting is not the same as a chapel service. Well, no one in our family enjoyed Sidwell and we eventually left. Now I'd recommend a longer list that includes friendlier schools. They tend not to be as selective but they're often better in other ways.

I wouldn't say we were social climbers. When we made our original list, we thought we were identifying the three schools that fit the best. We were wrong.

Sidwell is Quaker. Most quaker schools are expensive. However, Sidwell puts less emphasis on Quaker values than most Quaker schools. You don't get a whole lot of Quaker simplicity there. You still hear about Quaker values from time to time and kids do go to Quaker meetings from time to time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied to only those three schools for our kids because we wanted a secular, co-ed, K-12 school that was convenient for our location, and those three have the best reputations within that small set of criteria.

Sidwell is not secular.

It’s not Quaker.

My Sidwell enrolled kids would disagree with you, based on their lived experience. Do you attend?

I did. It’s not Quaker. The price tag alone tells you that.

Look, the important thing for families from these 3 schools to remember is that they’re so much better than all the poors out there.

In the words of my neighbor, if you can't go to a top 3 school, might as well go public. Lesser privates have a disproportionate number of kids who couldn't function well in a public school classroom for a variety of reasons.


People who say things like this and who believe in the words "lesser privates" are the social climbers. Buying into the "big 3" nonsense is telling.

I think I saw your neighbor at Millie's last night!!