<p>DS loves his (first) Bean boots, but who knew that was the “correct” choice? I do think boys are easier. Non-athletic kid has lost three belt notches since starting his first sport and now wears pants fashionably bunched at the waist. When I commented that he’ll need to bring those all home at Thanksgiving break so I can alter them (if possible) or donate and get new ones that fit, he replied, “naw, that’s OK, it’s just that a belt is not optional now”. He’s clueless, so I guess we have a pass on fashion for the time being. On the other hand, he has noticed the kid who is asking opinions about which interior he should choose for the very expensive car his father is buying him.</p>
<p>Not to nit-pick, but I don’t consider Hunters the “Coach” of rain boots. </p>
<p>IMO Coach, over the last ten or so years, has turned itself into a fashion brand (I’m thinking of bags with the big logo’d C prints) when it once stood simply for high quality leather goods.</p>
<p>Even though Hunter has recently followed Coach into the fashion arena, the thing they are really known for is their basic non glossy “wellington” style boot. A practical rain/mud boot, which has been a farm/horse country wardrobe staple for a long long time. The brand is old and British (sort of what Ralph Lauren aspires to be). I put it in the same camp as Barbour. And both of these brands, for some families, are very practical items…not bought for status/fashion reasons at all. Sometimes that “game pocket” comes in handy in the field. [I can’t believe I just wrote that sentence without a lick of intentional irony. ;-P]</p>
<p>I agree with muf123 that “the less flashy the more classy”…regardless of actual socio-economic status.</p>
<p>@SevenDad: You are correct about Coach. I still have my original bags (wont say how old), but as the company no longer offers its unconditional lifetime guarantee (as I found out when I tried to have one repaired) and seems to focus more on competing with the colorful /cloth brands and not touting its saddle leather as much, Ive turned away. Fortunately, those original products were built to last a lifetime, so I just keep polishing </p>
<p>My niece loves her Bogs.</p>
<p>I was glad to see Wellington-style boots come into style a few years ago. However, aren’t they rather uncomfortable to wear in a heated building, with no puddles or mud in sight?</p>
<p>@classicalmama & ChoatieMom: Quality endures. I’ve had my Bean 12" (because bigger is better, right?) since, oh, 1985…and have even had a new set of bottoms put on…hopefully Bean still offers this service. They don’t see too much wear these days since in truly cold “shovel the driveway” weather I use Sorel sno-pacs (like a Bean Boot with massive amounts of insulation) and the non-lace convenience and height (perfect for waterlogged crawlspaces and broken sump pumps!) of the Hunters makes them my go-to in rainy conditions. That said, all this talk has made me nostalgic, so perhaps I’ll break the Beans out soon…do they still not tie the laces up all the way?</p>
<p>@Periwinkle: This summer, my wife had a meeting in NYC. When she left our house, it was raining and cloudy so she wore her Hunters. By the end of her day in NYC it was sunny and warm and the apparently the Hunters got pretty steamy. She was not a happy camper.</p>
<p>I think one thing that we’re talking about here is fashion vs. quality. Old Coach bags, Bean boots, Hunters, Barbours, etc…while they may not always be “what’s in”, these items have always been about quality, durability, and utility. And IMO, they will never go out of style.</p>
<p>Contrast this with the “status symbol” items of the moment with the flashy logos that will eventually be replaced by a new style or become gauche. You’ll almost never go wrong erring on the side of quality. </p>
<p>How many kids know that back in the day (founded in 1892), Abercrombie was an outfitter not so different from LL Bean or Orvis?</p>
<p>Ha! Thanks @SevenDad for the Abercrombie reference. My nieces think I’m old and just “mis-remembering” when I tell them that Abercrombie used to look a lot like Brooks Brothers, and I don’t remember kids milling around the store. You’ve vindicated me! And I couldn’t agree more with quality trumping flash every time. I think I’ll dust off my pearls (first anniversary present).</p>
<p>Choatiemom- yeah, the belt IS the one thing that is non negotiable. Freshman boys seem to get taller and thinner. Don’t worry too much about the pants- trust me from experience, if you buy an expensive pair he will ruin them the first week back playing mud football outside of Mem! Weather here is clear and dry, the plane should not run into any weather problems on the east coast!</p>
<p>Thanks BSR. Weather appears to be clear in origination city, Hartford, connection city, and here as well, so we’re optimistic, but I can’t concentrate on work (I shouldn’t be here right now, but I just find comfort “listening” to the voices of other BS parents as they talk about things that no one else I know is remotely interested in). Pants will be coming from Walmart or Target, so no worries. ;)</p>
<p>Memma32,</p>
<p>I think you made some good points in your post. I, as middle class, have a child that may matriculate at a named boarding school for 9th grade. I can’t help but think the environment the child will enter will be one made up mostly of the “haves” versus the “have nots”. With an price tag of $30 to $40K and only about 33% of the student body on financial aid, how ever could it not be?</p>
<p>If we agree with this premise, I fear that four years of constant exposure to a majority of the student body who may have significant material assets, and who may posses a different feeling for the value of money, and who may follow a jet-setting lifestyle, serves no good purpose to those students who come from “have not” families.</p>
<p>About seventy five years ago these schools were clubs for wealthy kids. We seek a boarding schools that have transformed themselves the most, and who effectively minimize the socio-economic gaps between the students. But we don’t know how to locate such schools? Any ideas?</p>
<p>@participant, Our family had the same concerns that you are thinking. We found our kids mature enough to handle most of the challenges BS has to offer. My D does come home with amusing stories of her observations and we talk about it as a family. I realized I can’t keep my kids in a protected bubble forever. They’re going to be exposed to all kinds of people and situations as they grow into college and on to the work force. Most people will tell you that BS kids are very ready for college because they’ve been exposed to so much more -(management of time, dealing with many types of personalities, ect).</p>
<p>In my experience the parents are much more in a twist about the economic divide than the kids. The kids are aware of the differences, but BS is a major equalizer. Regardless of income students live in the same housing, eat in the same dining hall, take the same classes, play on the same teams and go to the same parties, dances and events. Even take-out and trips off campus are usually to the local pizza parlor, Chinese dive, or Subway. Very rarely have my kids run into kids going to fancy restaurants or events during the school year. </p>
<p>The haves and have-nots are mostly obvious from clothing choices and where kids spend their school breaks. There are always exceptions, but generally most kids seem to take income level as just another characteristic of their friends, like where they live or what sports they play. My kids have certainly made friends whose lifestyles they will likely never share, but that is also true of their friends from China, etc. They appreciate the differences, and do not feel that it really has anything to do with their reality. They do not expect me to buy them designer clothes or take them to Paris for the summer.</p>
<p>@participant: It may be hard to locate such a school because the economic divide is not the main concern of most schools or students; education is the goal. Im not sure its the job of a school to minimize these gaps, especially as they rely on FP students to contribute to operating costs and, even then, most schools report that tuition covers just a percentage of those costs. If tuition is $30 to $50K then, as you point out, the majority of students will be haves on the financial scale (which does not translate to haves on any of the more important scales). If your main concern is no good purpose arising from your child rubbing shoulders with those more wealthy, perhaps the best way to remove that concern is to focus on schools where the tuition does not cross whatever line you determine to be troublesome or schools that dont charge tuition at all. But, usually, the tuition rate correlates with what a school is able to offer, and its the breadth of programs, quality of teaching, and resources of a school with deep pockets that make it attractive. Even if you completely remove the insane cost of most BS, you will be hard pressed to find good LPS or PS that do not have some students at the higher end of the economic continuum as wealth tends to flock toward the best programs, public or private.</p>
<p>I agree with @1012mom that parents seem to be more concerned about the divide than the kids and, as @muf123 points out, amusing stories provide teachable moments. And, just maybe, our regular joe kids are needed in these environments to provide equally amusing stories and teachable moments to kids on the other side of the divide.</p>
<p>I would not say that it serves “no good purpose” to be in an environment with have and have nots, because “have and have not” is a relative term. Some have money, some do not. Some have come from happy homes, some have not. Some have an easy time adapting to BS, some do not. It’s a trap to think that money is the be all and end all of success in life and that all should be measured by it. </p>
<p>My D has been exposed to people she would not usually meet - including the very wealthy and very poor people. I feel that she is not intimidated by anyone and that she has learned to meet people on their own terms.</p>
<p>Boarding school students might know that certain classmates are fantastically rich, most are exceedingly affluent, some middle class, and a few from disadvantaged backgrounds, but they do not see the manifestations in front of them as they would at a public or private day school. You do not know exactly how big your roommate’s house is, or know what position a parent holds in the same company where your parent works. I explained this to my son when he expressed concerns, before he went away. I never even made an association between one rather mousey girl who attended boarding school with me, and the huge corporation that bears her family’s name. I found out later, when somebody who attended college with her brother mentioned it. I knew that one of my closest friends for four years was the daughter of a successful doctor; I did not know until later that her mother was heiress to an immense real estate fortune. There are people from all different backgrounds: children of “hippie” parents, whose wealthy grandparents pay their tuitions; faculty kids of modest means, who get to attend tuition-free; etc., etc.</p>
<p>Stagemum- completely agree! There are all types at boarding school. You’re also going to run into students of great wealth at college. I’ll never forget the weird, actually crazy, not very bright girl on my hall freshman year at (brand name private college.) It wasn’t until years later that one of my friends from that year pointed out the household object that bore her last name. I never made the connection at the time!</p>
<p>All,</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply comments to my post #69. I don’t know if it’s the wine or not, but I feel better now. :)</p>
<p>Seriously, your comments reassure me that the apparent socio-economic gap can be a minor issue to a student at BS.</p>
<p>I have another topic to discuss but I believe I need to find the appropriate thread. That topic is: I’d be interested to obtain your opinions of how far in miles, and how long in time on a daily basis do you think it would be reasonable to drive your 9th grader to high school? At what point does the distance and time one-way become too great? Surely, at some point, it becomes excessive and therefore a disservice to the student because of lost time? For example, a 30 minute drive, or 45? How about 1 hour and 15 minutes each way? The reason I ask is that our local day school choice is 1 hour and 15 minutes each way. That is why the concept of boarding school has surfaced. Thoughts?</p>
<p>bumping this thread for new parents</p>
<p>We live about 45 minutes from a Hidden Gem which offered us incredibly generous FA. There were more day students than boarders, so she did not want to board there. It was not my d’s top choice, but the offer was hard to turn down… until we started to realistically think about the driving. It would be a total of 3 hours in the car every day, and probably often on weekends as well. I have a full-time job, so the mornings would be very challenging. To feel really ‘integrated’ at school, she would most likely have to be there for breakfast, and stay until after study hall or evening activities. Basically, we realized that she’d just be coming home in time to go to sleep, and then getting up really really early. So in the end, we are going with her first choice-- a school that is twice as far away, has a greater percentage of boarders, and she will board there.</p>
<p>A relevant article from the NYT about socio-economic disparity at elite prep schools:
<a href=“For Minority Students at Elite New York Private Schools, Admittance Doesn’t Bring Acceptance - The New York Times”>For Minority Students at Elite New York Private Schools, Admittance Doesn’t Bring Acceptance - The New York Times;
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I read that article in the Times when it came out, and one thought is that that divide might be more obvious in a day school setting, where kids are returning every night to their neighborhoods and old friends. At prep school, everyone lives in the nice or not-so-nice dorm rooms with limited space for the extra stuff that would differentiate one kid from another, and life at school and away from school is more separate. </p>
<p>What I would tentatively postulate is that there’s sometimes a difference in attitude between a kid who has options should prep school not work out and one who doesn’t. Knowing that prep school is a gift and–should he or she succeed–a doorway into that world of privilege puts pressure on a kid that can manifest in ways that other more privileged kids don’t really get. So a kid might be judged, at times, as overly intense or competitive or serious or stressed or angry when he or she is just swimming hard against the tide–as he or she probably has done for a long time to get to prep school in the first place. I don’t think this makes a huge difference in a kid’s day-to-day life at boarding school, but I think it can pop up from time to time–and it’s why I am glad my kid is at a school where about half the kids are on FA.</p>