Anonymous
07/31/2008 11:56
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
For 2008-09, tuition at Beauvoir is $25,970, plus a $700 registration fee. That does not include aftercare.
Anonymous
07/31/2008 11:42
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:To 21:32: It is really quite simple, though probably not PC to state so boldly. The obsession with Beauvoir has to do with:
1) The fact that it is THE most expensive independent elementary school, in a city of overly-expensive elementary independent schools, and
2) The fact that it is affiliated with National Cathedral and therefore the Episcopal Church, which is regarded by many as The Church in this country (just ask any Episcopalian), and
3) The fact that it has a super-involved parent and alum group who act as a PR machine to keep the myth alive.
Have I left anything out?
These facts keep alive a culture of "haves" (those in the school) and "have nots" (those who were not admitted). As with anything else, the "have nots" play just as big a role in the PR machine of the "haves" because they also perpetuate the myths, by obsessing about what they are missing.
It's basic psych 101. An analogy: remember not getting into alpha alpha alpha sorority, and having to pretend that you were OK with beta beta beta???
You are completely wrong on many counts. For instance, the easiest to factual prove is that Beauvoir is not THE most expensive elementary school:
Beauvoir: $24,440
St. Patrick's (k-3): $25,253
Sidwell Lower School: $26,790
Maret (k-4): $24,695
GDS: (PK-K) $25,685 (1-5) $27,445
and others such as Sheridan, Lowell, Norwood, etc.. are not far behind in price.
Holy sh#t. Is this the rate for the coming year, or have they gone up even more?
Anonymous
06/25/2008 09:25
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Anonymous wrote:To 21:32: It is really quite simple, though probably not PC to state so boldly. The obsession with Beauvoir has to do with:
1) The fact that it is THE most expensive independent elementary school, in a city of overly-expensive elementary independent schools, and
2) The fact that it is affiliated with National Cathedral and therefore the Episcopal Church, which is regarded by many as The Church in this country (just ask any Episcopalian), and
3) The fact that it has a super-involved parent and alum group who act as a PR machine to keep the myth alive.
Have I left anything out?
These facts keep alive a culture of "haves" (those in the school) and "have nots" (those who were not admitted). As with anything else, the "have nots" play just as big a role in the PR machine of the "haves" because they also perpetuate the myths, by obsessing about what they are missing.
It's basic psych 101. An analogy: remember not getting into alpha alpha alpha sorority, and having to pretend that you were OK with beta beta beta???
You are completely wrong on many counts. For instance, the easiest to factual prove is that Beauvoir is not THE most expensive elementary school:
Beauvoir: $24,440
St. Patrick's (k-3): $25,253
Sidwell Lower School: $26,790
Maret (k-4): $24,695
GDS: (PK-K) $25,685 (1-5) $27,445
and others such as Sheridan, Lowell, Norwood, etc.. are not far behind in price.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:39
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
It did come after my initial post. Actually, it was because of some particular posts on the subject (one in particular) that I did rethink my decision. I realized that half the reason I was sending my son was so that I could be part of some club, a club I realize I really don't aspire to afterall. I am the same mom who has more recently posted it is a total waste of money, and my son only wants to do it because his friends are all doing it, and the only reason his friends are doing it is because their uber-moms signed them up for it.
Do I think it's harmful? No. Not really. But not necessary.
Do I think it's harmful? No. Not really. But not necessary.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:33
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Anonymous wrote:I'll say half the class did. Lots of kids who didn't were invited to a few of the dances by friends who signed up.
Some of the dances were sweet, like the cowboy one, and the sock hop.
But I wouldn't try and convince a child to do it, if they don't want. A good friend of mine made me rethink my position on cotillion. I think if your kid normally likes to get dressed up and is begging you to learn to dance, take him/her. If not, maybe wait until they actually want to do the activity on their own. There's time to learn to dance.
We would love to hear more about your "rethinking" of your position. Did that come after your intial post? There was a related Beauvoir Cotillion thread that I found very interesting.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:30
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
I'll say half the class did. Lots of kids who didn't were invited to a few of the dances by friends who signed up.
Some of the dances were sweet, like the cowboy one, and the sock hop.
But I wouldn't try and convince a child to do it, if they don't want. A good friend of mine made me rethink my position on cotillion. I think if your kid normally likes to get dressed up and is begging you to learn to dance, take him/her. If not, maybe wait until they actually want to do the activity on their own. There's time to learn to dance.
Some of the dances were sweet, like the cowboy one, and the sock hop.
But I wouldn't try and convince a child to do it, if they don't want. A good friend of mine made me rethink my position on cotillion. I think if your kid normally likes to get dressed up and is begging you to learn to dance, take him/her. If not, maybe wait until they actually want to do the activity on their own. There's time to learn to dance.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:27
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Hey - That was Me - Did most of the class actually participate? I'm still trying to persuade DC.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:25
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
No. I think I'm correct. It's "That was I"
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:23
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
"That was me" is correct!
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:21
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Hey! That was me (rather, that was I!)
It was Capital Cotillion.
It was Capital Cotillion.
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:18
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Anonymous wrote:I actually like cotillion. I don't think it's turning the children into mini adults. If my son hated going I wouldn't make him, but truth be told, he likes it. He likes seeing all his friends there, and he likes the cookies and lemonade. I don't know, maybe I'm not looking around as much as I should.
Which cotillion are you referring to?
Anonymous
06/24/2008 15:13
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
you never know. i was shocked at tim russert memorial that maria shriver said her child didn't get into boston college b/c they didn't have the right connections. on the waiting list. go figure! even kennedys get waitlisted at schools. you never know why!
Anonymous
06/21/2008 22:39
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
What you left out is that almost without exception, each family is rich, or powerful, or both. Their connections in both the private and public spheres are vast. The family directory reads like a Who's Who of Washington. It's almost like Skull and Bones for the adult set. They are, much as I hate to admit it, a rather glamorous if boorish bunch. Throw in some scandal [the other Beauvoir thread is but the most recent] and you have a recipe for a real life telenovela.
This is such BS. There are lots of non-connected, not "super rich" nor powerful families at B. I could list numerous ones even without the directory. There are also several other independent schools in Washington with an equal or greater number of powerful, rich, and connected families and you do not have to look far. B is a really great school but lets have a little bit of perspective, please.
Anonymous
06/21/2008 15:06
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
Anonymous wrote:To 21:32: It is really quite simple, though probably not PC to state so boldly. The obsession with Beauvoir has to do with:
1) The fact that it is THE most expensive independent elementary school, in a city of overly-expensive elementary independent schools, and
2) The fact that it is affiliated with National Cathedral and therefore the Episcopal Church, which is regarded by many as The Church in this country (just ask any Episcopalian), and
3) The fact that it has a super-involved parent and alum group who act as a PR machine to keep the myth alive.
Have I left anything out?
These facts keep alive a culture of "haves" (those in the school) and "have nots" (those who were not admitted). As with anything else, the "have nots" play just as big a role in the PR machine of the "haves" because they also perpetuate the myths, by obsessing about what they are missing.
It's basic psych 101. An analogy: remember not getting into alpha alpha alpha sorority, and having to pretend that you were OK with beta beta beta???
You hit the nail on the head.
What you left out is that almost without exception, each family is rich, or powerful, or both. Their connections in both the private and public spheres are vast. The family directory reads like a Who's Who of Washington. It's almost like Skull and Bones for the adult set. They are, much as I hate to admit it, a rather glamorous if boorish bunch. Throw in some scandal [the other Beauvoir thread is but the most recent] and you have a recipe for a real life telenovela.
Anonymous
06/21/2008 14:31
Subject: Re:Beauvoir
To 21:32: It is really quite simple, though probably not PC to state so boldly. The obsession with Beauvoir has to do with:
1) The fact that it is THE most expensive independent elementary school, in a city of overly-expensive elementary independent schools, and
2) The fact that it is affiliated with National Cathedral and therefore the Episcopal Church, which is regarded by many as The Church in this country (just ask any Episcopalian), and
3) The fact that it has a super-involved parent and alum group who act as a PR machine to keep the myth alive.
Have I left anything out?
These facts keep alive a culture of "haves" (those in the school) and "have nots" (those who were not admitted). As with anything else, the "have nots" play just as big a role in the PR machine of the "haves" because they also perpetuate the myths, by obsessing about what they are missing.
It's basic psych 101. An analogy: remember not getting into alpha alpha alpha sorority, and having to pretend that you were OK with beta beta beta???
1) The fact that it is THE most expensive independent elementary school, in a city of overly-expensive elementary independent schools, and
2) The fact that it is affiliated with National Cathedral and therefore the Episcopal Church, which is regarded by many as The Church in this country (just ask any Episcopalian), and
3) The fact that it has a super-involved parent and alum group who act as a PR machine to keep the myth alive.
Have I left anything out?
These facts keep alive a culture of "haves" (those in the school) and "have nots" (those who were not admitted). As with anything else, the "have nots" play just as big a role in the PR machine of the "haves" because they also perpetuate the myths, by obsessing about what they are missing.
It's basic psych 101. An analogy: remember not getting into alpha alpha alpha sorority, and having to pretend that you were OK with beta beta beta???