I've been oriented...

[thyme4change]

I went to my daughter's new school orientation.  I'm sick of the hype already, and she hasn't even started yet.  They went on and on about how they provide such a better educational experience, because they require children to be responsible for themselves and barf, barf, barf.  

They also insisted that their program was better because they didn't do dioramas or living wax museums.  That seemed weird to me, because this is a 5th - 12th grade school.  Does that age group usually do dioramas?  I thought that was something that elementary aged kids would do.  Maybe a 5th grader, but I wouldn't expect any high school student to do that kind of thing.  Maybe that is a staple at Montessori?  

I know they are marketing themselves and want to attract the best students (and the parents of the best students) but I know a lot of their success is because they kick kids out if they aren't doing well.  Easy to have high scores when you just toss out all the low scoring students.  

But, I still think it is the best option for my daughter - parental bullshit aside.  Any of you ever deal with a school like this?  Does the self-worship get more tolerable or am I going to have to deal with this forever?

[swamp]

My kids go to a private catholic school and they are high on the self worship. 

I tell myself that if they were as awesome as they think they are, they'd have more than 10 kids in a class.  One of these days, I'm afraid I may say it out loud.

[Malarky]

I can be very blunt.  On the last day of middle school for DD, I had to pick something up from the office.  One of the staff asked me if I was sad to be leaving.

I took the opportunity to tell them that it had been the most miserable six years of my kids and my life.  My kids have thrived since leaving there.

[thyme4change]

Wow.  Why didn't you change schools earlier?  

(and LOL swamp.)

[Deleted]

I think the correct term is 'Asianed'.

[thyme4change]

ROFL

[Malarky]

It was the middle school.  I couldn't afford private school and I couldn't work and get the kids to the charter school-which is in a different town.

They now attend two different high schools and both of them are doing great. 

I personally couldn't have survived the stifling environment of the middle school.  It was completely, physically segregated by grade.  They were expected to conform in every way shape and form.  The right notebook, arranged just so, etc.  The correct answer is only correct if arrived at in the approved fashion.  Way too restrictive.

 

[swamp]

The right notebook, arranged just so, etc.

I never understood that.  I know kids need some help learning how to orgainize, but is it really productive to make it that restricive?  

[thyme4change]

This new school is suppose to foster creative learning, and they gave a handout on their theory, but I didn't really understand the handout.  It had three different things on there - so I wasn't clear on if they used all of them, or if they were comparing some other theories to theirs, but I'm not sure which one was theirs.  If they did use multiple theories, I can't tell if they used them all at the same time, or what.  I know that I don't know squat about educating people - but I hope they can explain things to kids better than they could to me.


Oh - and the OTHER thing (this is what I really should have made the thread about)

They offer things to help kids who are going to be on the low end of the skill set to come up to speed, but they also open these things up to everyone.  So, they have a summer program to help those that are behind the average get prepared.  But at the orientation they suggested that everyone sign up, because it helps kids get used to the new school.

At what point do we do things to help those that are not superstars become absolutely necessary, and therefore don't help the people who need it most?  It seems so counter-productive.  But, I suspect it is just a money maker.

[milee]

As much as schools complain about it, they appear to be gearing their programs towards helicopter parents. 

No more choosing a school because it's a good fit for your kid and then allowing your kid to grow with limited supervision - parents are now asked to be super-involved cheerleaders. 

Which is funny, because unless a kid really needs close supervision in a certain area, encouraging helicoptering seems just about the worst thing schools and parents can do for a child's growth. 

[Deleted]

I want to have this problem.   We applied to two private schools for DS and should be hearing their decisions this week.  Fingers and toes crossed because they had about a bajilion applicants for a few spaces.

[thyme4change]

Good luck anne - I know the pain of that anticipation.  There were several hundred applicants for 100 slots, and it was done by lottery.  My daughter really wanted to go there, and I do think it will be a good fit for her - I just have to get used to the new politics.  And I was stressing out because our plan B was not really a good idea, and if she didn't get in, I'm not sure what we would have done.

[Deleted]

I got irritated during DS' visits to the schools because they were still selling them to us.  They could have gotten us to mud wrestle for spots - there was no need to keep advertising.

Congrats on your daughter getting in! 

[Phoenix84]

The only thing worse is college orientation.  Mine was ridiculous.  First it was one full 9 hour day of lectures and presentations, then you ate dinner at the dining halls and spent the evening socializing at the student center, then slept in a dorm room for the night, then another full 9 hour day of lectures and presentations.  Most of the presentations weren’t that interesting or useful.  Who wants to attend a presentation of “how to deal with a gay roommate” and “the importance of going to class.” 

They had parents in on it too, and eventually my folks and I had enough and played hooky for a few hours. 

ETA: Oh yeah, and they assigned you a book to read before even showing up to college orientation and had the author there for a Q&A.  I even remember the book to, "Nickel and Dimed, on not getting by in America."  It's was about a lady who quit her professional job to work low wage jobs like a waitress and at wal mart. 

. 

[milee]

Phoenix, of everything you described, I would have played hooky for 95% of it, too.  Except the Q&A with Barbara Ehrenrich (author of Nickel and Dimed.)  I really enjoyed that book, even though I had issues with some of her premise and her intellectual dishonestly with certain decisions she made to make the book more dramatic.

[Phoenix84]

Mar 4, 2013 14:16:42 GMT -5 milee said:

Phoenix, of everything you described, I would have played hooky for 95% of it, too.  Except the Q&A with Barbara Ehrenrich (author of Nickel and Dimed.)  I really enjoyed that book, even though I had issues with some of her premise and her intellectual dishonestly with certain decisions she made to make the book more dramatic.

Yeah, I'd say only about 5% of it was useful information.

And yeah, many people in the audience brought and questioned many of the decisions she made throughout the book that made her life harder than it had to be for the sake of drama.  And everyone questioned why she kept her car when she couldn't "pay" for it. 

[milee]

Mar 4, 2013 14:19:53 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Mar 4, 2013 14:16:42 GMT -5 milee said:

Phoenix, of everything you described, I would have played hooky for 95% of it, too.  Except the Q&A with Barbara Ehrenrich (author of Nickel and Dimed.)  I really enjoyed that book, even though I had issues with some of her premise and her intellectual dishonestly with certain decisions she made to make the book more dramatic.

Yeah, I'd say only about 5% of it was useful information.

And yeah, many people in the audience brought and questioned many of the decisions she made throughout the book that made her life harder than it had to be for the sake of drama.  And everyone questioned why she kept her car when she couldn't "pay" for it. 

How did she respond to those questions?

[Phoenix84]

"How did she respond to those questions?"

Well, I do remember when we asked her about her car, she said that she didn't want the book to be about her waiting at bus stops and struggeling to get where she needed to go, or something to that effect.

That's the only one I recall because it was the top question on everyone's mind. 

Holy crap, that was almost 10 years ago!  Damn, I'm getting old .  Sorry I can't provide more details. 

[thyme4change]

Well, I do remember when we asked her about her car, she said that she didn't want the book to be about her waiting at bus stops and struggeling to get where she needed to go, or something to that effect.

So, she wanted to write a book about how tough it is to be poor, but she didn't want to make it boring by showing how tough it is to get transportation when you are poor?  Sounds lame.  I think riding the bus is one great way to get a glimpse into how thing that seem quite simple to someone with just a little bit of money can be quite difficult for people without the same resources.  [/span]

[milee]

Mar 4, 2013 15:02:28 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Well, I do remember when we asked her about her car, she said that she didn't want the book to be about her waiting at bus stops and struggeling to get where she needed to go, or something to that effect.

So, she wanted to write a book about how tough it is to be poor, but she didn't want to make it boring by showing how tough it is to get transportation when you are poor?  Sounds lame.  I think riding the bus is one great way to get a glimpse into how thing that seem quite simple to someone with just a little bit of money can be quite difficult for people without the same resources.  

[/span][/quote]

Definitely an inconsistency.

On the other hand, that was not the usual issue I remember from the book.  My impression was that in multiple cases, she deliberately chose things that would put her in a worse position in order to have a more dramatic story.  It's been years since I read the book, but it seemed like there were some striking examples.  In one case, when she was looking for work, she got a call back for an interview with an employer who would have paid her several dollars more per hour than the job she ultimately took, but chose not to bother to go to the interview for the higher paid position.  In another cases, she did things like buy work clothes at mainstream, more costly stores instead of just buying a cheap Target or thrift store pair of black pants, for example.  Stuff like that.

[NastyWoman]

It has been a long time since I read that book too, but I remember it as quite an eye opener to me.  Yes, she could have made some different/better choices but I have also read many, many posts on this forum that show that her choices weren't that far off the mark of what people actually do.
Also, when I read about the struggles of posters like Shasta, I recognize many things that I read in this book.  I really think that this book was a good choice to make incoming college students read.  If they don't come from a struggling family (struggling for needs not wants) they really don't have a clue how tough it can be out in the "real world".  And that in turn leads to tone deafness such as when Ann Romney declared that she and Mitt where struggling students selling off some of his stocks to survive.  This is not a political statement btw, since I still don't think she was cold and/or heartless, it is just that she was never forced to see!

[milee]

I can see where it could be an eye opener for people who had never struggled.

Since I grew up poor, I guess my reaction was the opposite, though.  I was very angry with the author for not making better choices to manage what little income she had.  When money is that precious, you don't waste it and her choices surprised me. 

[Deleted]

On the other hand didn't  she also start out with some $$, and car, which would not necessarily mirror what others have to start... ?

[thyme4change]

Mar 4, 2013 15:31:08 GMT -5 milee said:

I can see where it could be an eye opener for people who had never struggled.

Since I grew up poor, I guess my reaction was the opposite, though.  I was very angry with the author for not making better choices to manage what little income she had.  When money is that precious, you don't waste it and her choices surprised me. 

Many people make bad choices - so her purposely making choices to mimic those that make bad choices probably isn't that far off.  

I knew a lady who left her husband because he beat her often.  After spending a couple of weeks in a shelter, she joined a program to help her get back on her feet.  Part of the program was she had to keep food at her house for her kids to eat.  She thought it was better to eat at Taco Bell every night, so she quit the program.  Without the support of that program, she lost her apartment, so she went back to her husband.  So, she lived with an abusive guy because she didn't want to go to the grocery store and buy a thing of hot pockets.  Bad choice.  

[swamp]

Getting beat vs. having to eat hot pockets.  Tough choice. 

[Phoenix84]

"I really think that this book was a good choice to make incoming college students read.  If they don't come from a struggling family (struggling for needs not wants) they really don't have a clue how tough it can be out in the "real world".  And that in turn leads to tone deafness such as when Ann Romney declared that she and Mitt where struggling students selling off some of his stocks to survive.  This is not a political statement btw, since I still don't think she was cold and/or heartless, it is just that she was never forced to see!"

Well, as I stated it's been many moons since I read the book.  But I think the issue was that if she really wanted to do a proper case study on the working poor, she should have given up her car.  It would have freed up more money (as milee put it, a precious resource) for other things and given a more realistic depiction of the working poor.  And yeah, I do remember (I think it was the maid job) where she turned down a higher paying maid job for the lower paying maid job. 

The thing I remember most from the book was where she lived, particularly the guys who were unrelated but rooming together. 

[thyme4change]

Turning down the higher paying job isn't an inconsistency to me.  After all, she left a very high paying job to take a low paying job, it would defeat the purpose to go out and get a higher paying job.  If she was trying to see what it is like for people who make below a certain limit, then you have to stay below that limit.  

[milee]

I could be misremembering, but the premise wasn't to see what it was like to live below a certain income limit, the premise was to show that it's almost impossible to break free of poverty if you don't have a college degree.  She was railing against welfare and other reform, claiming it was simply not possible to live on the low wages that people were forced into.  It was supposed to be an indictment of the system and "the man" keeping people down through no fault of their own.

So if she's arguing for social reform claiming it's impossible to better yourself starting from menial jobs, it is intellectually dishonest to purposefully turn down jobs that would provide you a better quality of life.

[shanendoah]

Did it occur to anyone that the author knew she was writing a book and knew she had other options, and therefore chose the lower paying job so that someone who really needed that extra money might get the better paying maid job?

Just a thought. I've heard about the book but never read it.

Back to the OP: thyme4change- is this just a random private school, or do they follow a specific educational theory, like Montessori or Waldorf?
I ask because I think we will be seriously considering the Waldorf school here (there aren't any Montessori schools past middle school here) if we adopt an older child or when our child becomes older.

[thyme4change]

It is a charter school.  They are most definitely not Montessori.  I don't know what Waldorf is.