What's the knock on these schools?

Prep School Admissions
21

<p>Ops, it’s not the “structured environment” or the consequences for misdeeds but the FOCUS on demerits and punishment that we noted during our tours of Groton and Kent, which was not so “top of mind” at any of the dozen other schools we visited during our fairly exhaustive search to find the right fit. That type of focus led us to believe that there were likely more students who needed “reminding” and “consequences” in order to toe the line, as it were, rather than a preponderance of more self-directed or self-motivated students. Our dd’s school has weekly dorm chores and daily rules and regs, but the culture is one of expectation to succeed in meeting expectations, including dorm discussions on how chores will be dealt with by each of the residents, rather than a punitive expectation that says, “you’d better do this or X will be the consequence.”</p>

<p>Again, for some parents and kids, the idea of a system Like Groton’s or Kent’s, with its more visible “structure” may be a plus, a needed step in developing self control and self direction. For our student, who had bought into the social contract early on, it would have been, for want of a better word, demoralizing. She preferred the “virtuous cycle” approach rather than the “carrot and (reversible) stick” approach.</p>

<p>And no, I did not see such consequences as raking leaves or other punishments that (as the AO not only admitted, but declared with some pride) are intended to publicly humiliate. Usually the consequences involve loss of privileges, early hours, or other, non-shaming disincentives to break the rules.</p>

22

<p>I’ll admit the AO remarks are discouraging or a poor choice of words, which we are all guilty of at times, especially me. I can’t imagine the intention is ever to publicly humiliate and if it is, then there is an issue. Every school deals with minor discipline matters somewhat differently and the penalties varies depending upon severity and quantity of demerits obtained over a period of time. Groton is a fantastic school and the kids there do know right from wrong but being teenagers they’ll push the envelope. The minor offenses they always think they can get away with and not just at Groton. I don’t understand why Groton would focus on demerits and punishment, that is unfortunate. A good catch on your part if you sense an environment of faculty versus the students.</p>

23

<p>I took the comments to contrast to other schools, where the attitude is that <em>everybody</em> does some kind of menial labor for the community, it’s part of the school ethos, and everyone already sees all of their friends and classmates in these roles, so there’s nothing shameful about it. </p>

<p>To make an explicit statement that part of a punishment system is not only restitutional work, but also a kind of humiliation carried out in public, is certainly “old school.”</p>

24

<p>Ah, ops, I think you nailed it with your last statement. We visited Groton having heard some really wonderful things about it, and I’m sure they’re all true. And the kids seemed as enthusiastic and engaged as at any of the other schools we visited. But it definitely had an air of, if not “faculty vs. students,” then certainly a “top-down” discipline style, if you will. </p>

<p>And as you noted that each school deals with minor (and even major) discipline matters somewhat differently, so each student responds differently to the various styles out there—and each parent, too. </p>

<p>To reflect back to the OP and the first response, from mountainhiker, one person’s “plus” can definitely be another person’s “minus.”</p>

25

<p>To girlgeekmom’s last point, we found Groton’s half-height dorm walls and “school room” study hall positively charming in a very “old school” way.</p>

26

<p>Yes, and one parent’s “student” is another parent’s ‘child’…or is that too “old school” for you geekmom?</p>

27

<p>I feel the need to speak up. At St. Mark’s there are work details. Students can be assigned to work details for certain disciplinary infractions, which are spelled out in the school’s handbook. (Available under the “About” tab on the website. Last item on the drop-down list.) “Weekend Work Detail” is scheduled on weekends. There are other penalties, such as being restricted to campus or the dorms, not being allowed to leave campus on weekends, or losing leadership positions. The school reworked the whole system recently, so refer to the online document for all the details. </p>

<p>The SDC (Student Disciplinary Committee) hears major school rule violations. It’s composed of four faculty members and five students (if I’ve counted the details in the handbook correctly.) The Head of School may attend the hearings. This committee can recommend penalties to the head. Very often, the students know more of a peer’s misdeeds than the faculty. </p>

<p>I’ve spent some time Googling. I’ve found similar systems of penalties at Taft, Deerfield, Andover, Middlesex… I’m certain I can find more, because it’s necessary for boarding schools to have some penalties for misbehavior short of suspending or expelling a student. I think a formal system of discipline is a good thing. Boarding schools are communities. There must be a method for a school to mete out consequences for misbehavior. </p>

<p>I recommend any parent considering boarding schools make an extra effort to read a school’s handbook before sending their child away. The handbooks are usually available on the website. The schools may differ on details. Is the DC composed of faculty, are there students on the committee, can the students vote on decisions? Are there means to expiate minor infractions, or is the system set up to warn once or twice before suspension or expulsion? </p>

<p>In all the schools we visited, an open flame in the dorm will get you expelled. Locked doors are not permitted while students are in them. There are good reasons for the rules, but make certain you can live with them before sending your children away.</p>

28

<p>Oh, how could you Periwinkle?! My student is too enamored of learning for learning’s sake to EVER allow the - gasp - baser impulses of adolescence to bend, let alone break, ANY of those unfortunate rules…oh dear, oh dear… but I suppose there are some of less than sterling quality who would…</p>

29

<p>On a lighter note, a few years ago my wife and I received a letter in the Spring with 5 weeks to go before Summer break. The letter was from the Dean of Students to advise if ops jr. receives 3 more demerits that he would be placed on probation then followed by a DC hearing if need be. We were caught totally by surprise with all of this. We promptly proceeded to draft a letter in response, this being the first having been made aware of the alleged record breaking number of demerits in recent school history. All within 15 minutes of receiving the letter, digesting the contents and preparing our reply did we receive a call from the Form Dean. He proceeded to apologize profusely for failing to notify us of what had been transpiring over the school year. The infractions were so minute that he and ops jr’s Advisor never gave them a second thought. Of course, ops jr never told us, in fact everything was “wonderful”. But, there was an accumulation of over 65 demerits, all small infractions but infractions none the less. There was nothing serious just a bunch of little no-no’s. No sooner did we hang up with him did ops jr’s Advisor call, also to apologize profusely for the same reason the Form Dean had called. We all agreed that with 6 more demerits the hammer would fall. We finished the year with 3 additional demerits. That’s the lighter side, there is a dark side. Once in awhile the schools do get a real bad apple. He or she may have been suspended once already but it enables the school within the rules to dismiss the kid. So when you hear of a kid getting bounced for one thing, the odds are there’s whole list of other minor infractions.</p>

30

<p>@Leanid, your snarky posts do nothing to further this conversation. I use “student” and “child” interchangeably in my posts, and consider myself fairly “old school,” for what it’s worth. However, the fact that we are all participating in an ONLINE forum makes us ALL something less than “old school.”</p>

<p>@Periwinkle, thanks for the further clarification and expansion. I was not questioning the need for consequences, rather the form they take AND the attitude we received from the AO at Groton, which rather took us aback. </p>

<p>For every school with a work-based approach to discipline (in addition, perhaps, to a restriction of privileges), there is at least one other with a purely restriction-based; in some cases the latter schools also have fewer “strikes” to more severe disciplinary action. Our tour guide at Hotchkiss, for example, talked about the “$40K sip” – the students’ nickname for H’s zero-tolerance policy on drinking. PEA has a different approach to slip-ups of the substance nature, and is, at least on paper, somewhat more willing to work with students — dependent on a variety of factors, which are outlined quite clearly in the student handbook.</p>

<p>I <em>absolutely</em> agree with you that parents should really read the student handbooks of schools they and their children are considering. They provide insights into student life, school culture, and the all-important disciplinary process. Because even darling angels—as leanid seems to think I consider my student, er, child—can make costly mistakes, as other parents on these forums can attest.</p>

<p>BTW, at Emma an open flame ANYwhere in the school—indoors or out—will get you instantly expelled, as well—no matter how stellar your prior record. Our dd shared a story by her houseparent of stopping into a senior girl’s room, seeing what appeared to be lit candles, and resisting the urge to dive (cue slow-motion sound effects and a screaming "Nooooooooooo!) toward the offending pillars as she saw this remarkable student’s 4-years literally go down in flames. Turned out they were wax LED “candles.” Houseparent sigh of relief, and a policy instituted to show dorm staff your LED candles if you happen to have any in your room ;-)</p>

31

<p>Happy to oblige. By the way, I believe the term is ‘go UP in flames’ as oppsed to “down”.</p>

<p>I assume that means no smoking at Emma either, huh? Oh, wait, car lighters! – oh, not, they’ve disappeared along with ashtrays…tsk tsk.</p>

32

<p>“in some cases the latter schools also have fewer “strikes” to more severe disciplinary action”</p>

<p>That does seem to be true for some schools. Now, as I don’t have children at those schools, there could be a system which warns kids when they’re getting close to the edge. It’s one thing to read the handbook, it’s another to know how a system is implemented in practice. I prefer systems which don’t assume students will always know what to do. </p>

<p>girlgeekmom, I can’t know how the AO meant her comment to be taken. However, I said before that students know more about what happens than the adults. Having a work detail for smaller infractions which violate community expectations could be kinder than leaving discipline to the kids. I found an interview with Shamus Khan about St. Paul’s this afternoon, while trying to refresh my memory about seated meals:</p>

<p>[Freakonomics</a> Privilege: How Society’s Elite Are Made](<a href=“Freakonomics - The hidden side of everything”>Privilege: How Society's Elite Are Made - Freakonomics)</p>

<p>

[quote]
Venkatesh: The dormitories at St Paul’s School don’t have locks on the doors. Why is that? Is there a particular attitude towards crime and social order that is part of the socialization of elite youth at the school?
Khan: When I was a student at St. Paul’s, one of the first things I learned was NEVER to knock on a fellow dorm mate’s door. Why? Because if someone knocks on your door you know it’s a teacher, and if you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing, you should stop right away. But beyond that, not having locks conveys just how much trust and community there is at a place like St. Paul’s. The school works hard to be like a family. And families don’t put locks on their doors; they trust one another. This is a really powerful idea. It’s something admirable that the school tries to instill in its students. And it creates a deep bond between the students, along with the suggestion that those in your family (or class) can be trusted. More interestingly still, when things do start disappearing in a dorm (usually small items — like candy bars, pizza, or other food), it’s rare that the faculty will get involved. Students police one another. If they figure out who’s stealing, they socially isolate that person — which in a small high school of around 500 kids is incredibly painful. External authority doesn’t really get invoked. You could certainly think about this as part of the way that elites learn to subject themselves to their own rules, and to avoid external imposition of rules upon them.<a href=“emphasis%20added”>/quote</a></p>

33

<p>Lawrenceville is extremely relaxed. I had my first snowball fight with a faculty member at 7 in the evening. Coming from a place that never sees snow, I know I won’t ever forget this experience :D.</p>

34

<p>@leanid, well, I was thinking, UP in SMOKE, but DOWN in flames (Like an airplane going in…), but I see that UP in flames is also an idiom that would certainly be appropriate to the situation.</p>

<p>@periwinkle, I can’t “know” how the AO intended her comment but I’m reasonably good at reading affect. She clearly was proud of what she considered an “effective” method of punishment, and she clearly recognized the public humiliation value of said punishment (why else would you say, archly, that performing manual labor in sight of your peers will “teach you to appreciate the value of your prep school education”?).</p>

<p>As for the comment by Khan about students policing each other, I don’t see that as particularly unkind. Having attended a Quaker college with self government, it seems a civil way to run a community. While I agree being isolated socially might be “extremely painful”, as Khan notes, being stolen from is also painful, and in addition makes the victim of the theft feel less trusting, less safe in his or her community, and personally violated. </p>

<p>Unlike Khan, I do not see self-governance or dealing with problems “within the nest” as unique to “social elites.” I do think that, taken to extremes, the unwillingness to have oversight from outside authorities, or the hubristic idea that “we can take care of it” if “IT” is a serious crime or serious societal ill, can lead to seriously flawed situations. Penn State comes to mind.</p>

35

<p>Could we leave Penn State out of the discussion, please? </p>

<p>As for social isolation, I think you underestimate the power of shunning in an isolated community. St. Paul’s is 100% boarding. The school is the only source of teen friendship for the boarders. A day student can cultivate friendships with peers who are not enrolled at the same school. A boarder cannot.</p>

36

<p>Work duty, whether scheduled for everyone or doled out as punishment, is a common feature of east coast boarding schools. For some of the students, it may be the first time they have ever held a rake, or trowel or sponge in their hands, and they take a certain amount of pride in it. My kids still talk fondly of their jobs and the relationships they formed with the kitchen staff and grounds crew.</p>

37

<p>Okay, can we get back to the OP – the request was about “knocks” for schools. The AO’s touting of a punitive approach/attitude toward physical labor WAS a “knock” for our impression of Groton. YMMV.</p>

<p>Regarding social isolation, whether a school is 100% boarding or less, most boarders are going to have few options for cultivating friendships with peers who are not enrolled at the same school. </p>

<p>IN GENERAL, I believe that the consequences for stealing in a closed community need to be severe. Think about a school where dorm-room doors are expected or required to be UNlocked. Given the typical student desire not to “rat” on one’s peers, then a certain amount of self-policing is to be expected. And severe consequences for severe actions are to be expected, as well. So if “social isolation” makes a student who has stolen from another student feel bad, I fear I have little sympathy. </p>

<p>I’ll note also that the Khan quote was specifically about stealing. Theft or fear of theft is a quick route to the destruction of community through distrust and wariness. Isolating the cause of such destruction seems apt.</p>