I had to pay close attention to my gag reflex while reading
this article in The Washington Post, about a growing trend among D.C. parents to
board their children at private D.C. high schools. Yes, to save on the hassle of driving their spawn to and from school, lacrosse games, etc., many parents are shelling out upwards of $10,000 more on annual tuition for room and board.
The Post gave two examples: St. Alban's School, where boarding costs $13,677 on top of the usual $32,990 yearly tuition, and the Madiera School, which charges $11,110 for boarding and $35,050 for regular tuition. At St. Alban's, 19 of the 23 boarding students are local, as are about half of Madiera's 161 boarders.
Okay, I even attended a pricey private school in the D.C. area, and I find this disgusting. It's one thing to spend $30,000 a year on a good education, but blowing $10,000 to spare parents an hour of D.C. driving (however harrowing) just seems, um, terrible.
Another Washington Post writer
agrees with me; she points out how boarding school disrupts things like family dinners and time with siblings, all those valuable moments where we learn to discover ourselves at our most influential age. Parents who board their children argue that they still make time to visit their kids' sports games and concerts or whatever, but that just doesn't cut it for me.
I'm not anti-boarding school in general, but it does seem pointless, expensive, and ultimately harmful to board a child that lives within driving distance of his or her school. (To be fair, The Post did talk about one kid who boarded at St. Alban's to avoid a 75 minute commute from the depths of Virginia, which made a little more sense, but I still stand by my condemnation of everyone else.)
Is this crazy or what? Would you send your kids to boarding school if you had the extra cash?
Comments (9)
honestly, and don't hate me for it, i probably would. i'd try and get the best education for my kids. also, i think moving away from home would be great at that age! i learned a lot when i moved out. granted, i moved out when i left for university, but i don't really see the harm in leaving earlier. when i was 14-15, i would have loved the freedom. i know you mentioned that parents are doing it to avoid the commute but i'm sure some have other reasons. the kind of friends you'd make would be lifelong and i think parents take that into consideration. i know, they'd be missing out for dinners but they still have weekends and parents still visit the kids every so often. it's even better that they live somewhat close by because it could help prepare them for later on in life when they'd eventually move out. if they get homesick, they'd only be a drive away. know what i mean?
I disagree with boarding teenagers full time unless they are unusually mature and the program is one they are highly invested in.My first objection has to do with the benefits of inter-generational negotiations.it is maddening sometimes but people gain a lot of assertiveness training when dealing with family members. There is also more access to a broader ,and less elite community.If I could arrange it I would not want any of my kids in a culturally limited environment ,especially one defined by income.People can learn a lot by dealing with people from all kinds of backgrounds ,especially those who are poor who teach us not to respect dumb stereotypes..It may be the parents are thinking about security issues if they are high ranking government employees but I stilk think its not a good choice for many teens.Monetarily it suggests that there are families that can probably afford a tax hike.
My mother who was European attended boarding school(when a child she had a governess ).It was just one more layer of " help" between her parents and herself and when world events turned them all into refugees everyone in the family suffered an additional hardshio because my grandmother was not actually equipped to parent in chaous having never done it except in a highly formal manner.
Um no. I want to be in control of my child's education. I have a son (he's 5 months) and my husband and I plan on homeschooling him for several reasons...but the biggest reason is that children belong with their parents. We live in a society that is not set up to be family-friendly...and this article in the Post is just more evidence of this. In our society children (or lack thereof) are all about convenience and schedules. Something I'm just not into. My homeschool education was enough to get me accepted into every single university I applied to so I have no reason to believe it won't be good enough for my son.
@lot223@xanga - I can see your point. I learned a lot after leaving for college too. In fact, I think boarding school is pretty much okay, but it seems silly to send your kid to a school so close to home. But whatever, I don't really plan on having kids so it's fine, haha.
@sarah - no kids? i'm telling you you'll be missing out haha :) i just think moving away from home helps with responsibility, independence, leadership, and all the other good stuff, lol.
Gah! I read this article too. I live in the DC area and there is a big push for kids to get into private schools. My parents couldn't afford it and had faith in the public school system that it was a non-issue for my family. The family in the St. Alban's example is from McLean, VA. That's only a half-hour away from each other!!! It's ridiculous but it seems like these people have no regard for money so they'll pay crazy prices to board their kids.
@TheCheshireGrins@xanga - I dated a guy from St. Alban's. People there are such douches
I certainly wouldn't do it. I grew up thinking that if you don't have to spend in excess of thousands of dollars for something you don't NEED to do, then you don't do it. :p Save that for a cushion if something goes terribly wrong or something. Like, oh I don't know...an emergency...those things can sap you dry. Especially with the way private insurance treats even their highest paying customers.
However, if they do have the money, I don't see a problem with it. Not everyone spends family time even when they have the chance. Not every family has a close family relationship. I grew up only seeing my siblings once a year, and we NEVER had family dinners or family game night or anything else like that. So, to me, if that's the issue with it, then I don't agree.
For those families that do do those things, and won't be doing those things if kids are away at boarding school, then I would agree they're missing out on something. But, if those families may not do those things anyway...I don't see the problem with sending kids to boarding school if you have the money and feel like it.
It sounds to me like families that will do this feel that their children are more of a burden to them than anything, at least during this stage of their life, if the reasoning is so that they won't have to put up with taking their kids around to school and school functions and sports activities and whatnot. It isn't hard for kids, even younger kids, to pick up on that, either. And its probably something that is there anyway, even if you take boarding school out of the equation. But, there are exceptions to the rule, there always are. :p
Now, whether or not those families should be doing family activities with their kids (if they are not) is an entirely different matter. And if they are not, it won't change just because local kids are for some reason barred from being boarded at local schools.
Interesting. It really depends on what school you go to. If you choose
those in Geneva, sure! My daughter goes to a Canadian one near Niagara
Falls and doesn't cost a lot including food and board. Photos of school
residence:http://www.cic-totalcare.com/en/ResidenceLife.php.
They have gym and indoor pool where kids can work out in the winter. Harsh weather in Canada!