<p>Well said.</p>
<p>creative1, thank you, well said!</p>
<p>Yes, well said, it’s just that getting good grades is a RULE is your home?!</p>
<p>I agree with neato and creative1 in regards to SPS. The last few months have forced me to reassess how I parent. Before boarding school I thought I needed to ask my d if she had completed her homework and demand that it was completed within a certain time. At home I was her alarm clock, waking her every morning, screaming that she move faster so she didn’t miss the bus. I have discovered that she is perfectly capable of getting up on time and making it to her classes on time. She is also able to complete her assignments timely without me breathing down her neck. She can even manage her allowance. At first blush Freedom with Responsibility sounds like kids doing whatever they want, without consequences. But the reality has been that she is given the freedom to make choices, so far they have been good. When, and if, she makes poor choices there are adults (parents and teachers) who can help steer her in the right direction.</p>
<p>Hmmm. Creative1, where did I say that more rules = more care? (I guess that you are a “creative one”.) I said that rules are one form of contact between school and child and that rules, structure and supervision “signals” input, care and concern. Rules can be a sign of care, but care is made of much more than rules, of course. But without some rules, a person clearly doesn’t care. He is a nihilist. </p>
<p>As you note, there are many ways to have points of contact, other than rules. Please read my post again. I listed as “points of contact” many touches between child and school, including concen, care, input, help, supervision, direction, ideals, high purpose, etc. To lift one element form this list of “points of contact”, distort it and then pound it as my only or primary element of contact between school and students is reductive, if not worse.</p>
<p>The thrust of my post is that many points of contact between school and child is a good thing. If you disagree with me on this position, then fine. If I have been inartful in stating that position, then I must apologize. Because of your reaction, I must assume I have been unclear. So let me limp up once more and state my position again… It is my opinion that the more points of contact (i.e., the more structure, if you like) between a school and its students the better, IF you embrace the ideals and stated purposes of that school. There you have. Now do with it as you wish. Just don’t misstate it, if you please. Thank you.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is just a semantics thing. For example, toombs61, I would not equate structure with points of contact the way you have. I do like the term “points of contact” but I think of it more as loving hands resting gently on the child’s shoulders rather than railings on the path or handcuffs on the wrists.</p>
<p>“Freedom with responsibility” has been a little stressful at times. There was quite a bit of socializing early on, in addition to a fall and winter sport which took up even more time. Things now seem to be a little more grounded and calm. That said, I must say that because SPS is 100% boarding and I believe all faculty live on campus, everyone knows your child and what is going on. My daughter has a great advisor who has been very helpful in dealing with any issues that have come up. There are systems in place that make sure your child will not slip through the cracks.</p>
<p>M95, true; I think that there may be a negative connotation with the word “structure” on this thread. I think that “structure”, like most things, can be either good or bad. I see the word “structure” as used here (or as should be used here or at least as I’m using it here) more as a buliding than a harsh set of rules, penalties and standards.</p>
<p>Is the structure of a school sound? Do the various parts of the building/strucutre fit the landscape/the students? Is the structure beautiful? Does it work? What are the materials of which this structure is made? </p>
<p>I think that a great school should aspire to have a great “structure”, an overarching system, something that is permanent, all embracing and treasured. It is that “thing” that makes a child love a place forever. Cold facilities on a school campus never give love. It is always the students, the teachers AND the traditions that thrive in that school that allow a place to stand and stay in the hearts of so many. And I see the “structure” of that school holding all of the school together.</p>
<p>What I see as the “structure” of a school are the metaphysical bricks and steel of a magical place. Yes, that structure includes rules, but it also includes the words and deeds of past students held up high by the school for all to see. Yes, that structure includes the stern Latin teacher who enforces lights out, study halls and no smoking policies, but it also includes the kindly but firm college counselor who will never give up on your child and will push her daily to write the perfect application to Dartmouth. </p>
<p>I see the structure of a school, like I said, as every point of contact (whether sour or sweet) between the school and a child. The more contacts the better, IF you believe in the ideals and the purpose of that school.</p>
<p>Man, just how many SPS parents and SPS parents wanna-be are on this board?! :)</p>
<p>Benley! Now you make me jump in too! I was just lurking!
Pax vobiscum! There are rules at every school (lots of rules), they are enforced, and consequences can be dire. But internalized behavior will always work better than any efforts to impose externally. Our best protection as parents will be the choices our teens make when we are not there. The decisions they make themselves. We need those points on contact, and they need the responsibility to make good choices. Far better for them to learn this in high school than to screw up college.</p>
<p>e.g. Setting a bedtime sounds great, but not if we force teens to outwit adults by hiding a light under the blankets or waiting until we go to bed. When I was a Senior Prefect in a dorm of 9th graders, they had bedtimes. We enforced them (sometimes firmly, often humorously). Trust me the mice are smarter than all the cats. They have to learn to get the sleep they need.</p>
<p>I’m neither an SPS parent nor an SPS parent wanna-be. My son attends another HADES school, and that school and his development there have exceeded all of my highest expectations. That said, I admire SPS. Every graduate of SPS whom I have had the pleasure of knowing has been outstanding. Based upon my narrow window into SPS, that school seems to be a most magical place for its students and graduates.</p>
<p>Toombs61 And I respect you for it. There are LOTS of truly amazing and wonderful schools, and (depending on the teen) they can have an amazing and enriching experience and get get a fabulous education at any one of them. Much of this depends on the teen, not the particular school. Unfortunately, too many parents think if their teen can just get into School XYZ, life will be great. </p>
<p>Most of the SPS people have been inculcated with the Freedom with Responsibility philosophy. It is not always easy to describe to others, but it is no different from what we all try to do with all our kids. Of course…. They want the freedom part and we want the responsibility. With luck, all kids, at every school, will get both.</p>
<p>I am glad you guys made up! ;)</p>
<p>If tried to set a bedtime for my eighth graders they would look at me like I was nuts! </p>
<p>I don’t believe that one size fits all. Some kids may need a rigid structure, others need a more flexible one, and for still others, it doesn’t matter. </p>
<p>I guess I’m with creative1 on this. The only “rules” in our house are, do good work, don’t be lazy, and do unto others. There are two words that cannot be uttered, “bored” and “hate.” I don’t impose restrictive rules until my kids have screwed up. I just find it more respectful that way. It’s the way I would want to be treated, (the “do unto others” part of our house rules). </p>
<p>It all falls into place one way or the other.</p>
<p>Benley! I just got to this thread! I wasn’t making up with toombs. I never even entered the philosophical discussion of parenting (and since he is so polite, I hope I never will, but then I try to stay out of squabbles).</p>
<p>Neato: I agree.</p>
<p>structure teaches kids that actions have consequences, good and bad. structure pushes back on an adolescent tendency to relativistic, situational ethics. i see the merits of flexible structure, to allow an adolescent an opportunity to emotionally grow. however, i can not see why a minimum of structure would ever be the best balance.</p>
<p>Toombs - Thank you for your further explanation. I agree with Mainer95 and it does seem to be a case of semantics. I was merely expressing my own views and opinions and I apologize if you took it as a personal attack on your own thoughts. That wasn’t my intention. Your statement “What more structure, rules and supervision by a school signals, however, is more input, concern and care by the school for the kids. Such oversight by the school is what parents want, I think, from a school for their children.” I guess I was trying to point out that, in my opinion, you can have care and concern without a lot of rules and structure. </p>
<p>I’ll admit that the “freedom with responsibility” thing is not right for every child nor every family. Living through the process can be scary sometimes for a parent - when you see your 3rd former make choices (e.g. socializing too much) and face the consequences of those choices. As a parent, you just wish you could protect them from making those poor decisions at the time. Taking that step back isn’t always an easy one but watching your child learn from those consequences, grow and develop into a responsible young adult is very rewarding. 
Nor is the SPS “way” the only path to get there. Other schools follow different routes to achieve the same wonderful results. It is about knowing your own child, your own family and what works best for your situation. </p>
<p>Leanid - Yes, getting good grades is a rule in my house. My kids are bright and competent and completely capable of high grades as long as the effort is there. In public elementary and middle school, this is defined as expecting straight As. In boarding school, where the bar is so much higher and the equivalent of straight As is rare, I don’t expect quite that standard but I do expect decent grades and very high effort. If my kids were challenged with learning difficulties, my expectations would be different but I would expect them to work to the best of their abilities, but that isn’t the case.</p>
<p>Sorry if folks found my comments inflammatory but this thread is definitely an interesting read! :)</p>
<p>Seems like an awful lot of pressure to DEMAND high grades, irrespective of a child’s competence. Demand effort? – yes! Demand certain results? – dubious, very dubious.</p>
<p>Then, what happens to the next child of yours who doesn’t have quite the same “competence”. “Oh, it’s okay, I don’t expect YOU to get good grades, only your smarter siblings…” "Gee, mama, I g-guess I’m not as g-good as they are, but I’m a trooper and will bear my c-cross with dignity (sob, boo hoo…)</p>
<p>Hmmm.</p>
<p>leanid - i guess it depends on the family. For my kids - different in their strengths but all competent - it works. They are treated as individuals, know their own strengths but respect and recognize their siblings’ strengths as being laudable yet different from their own. Works for my family. Do whatever works best for yours.</p>
<p>
who said that?</p>