<p>I agree that I was pretty appalled by the clothes that I saw my D’s classmates wearing in middle school, to say nothing of what they wear now in high school. I see a lot of beahvior among my D’s friends at home that I’m happy to live without most of the year - constantly being on cellphones, wanting to go to parties at the homes of kids unknown to their parents, hair dyeing (I realize this is not a big deal but I still think it looks awful), etc.</p>
<p>Khan has a long discussion about girls pushing the envelope on what they wear to seated meal, and teachers being uncomfortable saying anything about it, and this is one way that girls use sexuality to escalate in the hierarchy at SPS. First of all, I don’t see why teachers don’t think they can say anything. If there’s a rule, and it’s not being followed, that’s their job. When I was at SPS Mr. Gillespie would sit in the corridor just outside the entrance to the Upper common room and send anyone who was inappropriately dressed back to their dorm to change. You can bet that no students wanted to question “The Rock” on this one!</p>
<p>Second, the situation of teen girls trying to dress in an inappropriate way and test out the effect of their sexuality is hardly isolated to SPS or boarding school, so the fact that girls do this doesn’t say much about SPS in my view. I think Khan should have elaborated on his point that sexuality is the ONLY means for girls to navigate the hierarchy at SPS, rather than putting so much focus on a phenomenon that’s so widespread beyond SPS. I do think that there is some truth to that point (about girls having fewer ways to navigate the hierarchy than boys), although again, that’s a situation that exists broadly outside of SPS.</p>
<p>@friendlymom: In my original draft of the post that includes a reference to Faith Hill, I noted that this phenomenon is not limited to SPS. I took it out because I took out a whole long rambling rant about “kids these days”.</p>
<p>Chalk up one more family for the thrift and consignment life, both for fiscal thrift and recycling. Especially good for dressy clothing including gowns for recitals, dances and other formal events, at least for girls, where there is more “turnover,” I think. </p>
<p>@friendlymom, though I find it sad if it’s true that sexuality is the ONLY means for girls to navigate the hierarchy at SPS, overt sexuality is one way high-school girls test their power and boundaries, and I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing, EXCEPT that in our Puritanical society boys still receive the message that the girls are “asking for it.” That said, I absolutely agree that what’s appropriate in the boudoir or at the beach is not appropriate for a sit-down meal. Or a concert. Or… name your event. But I think it’s universal. </p>
<p>At my dd’s all-girls school the student handbook shows that the admin must recognize it as an issue, because, in addition to noting that, “While styles may change, not all current fashions are appropriate in the classroom” [there is a more formal expectation for events] and goes on to include the following two, of about a dozen, items:
2. Underwear, including camisoles, must be covered at all times.
3. Low-cut shirts or any other top that exposes cleavage may not be worn.</p>
<p>Now, you and I probably would think those points obvious. But apparently some girls need reminding that one doesn’t wear one’s dainties in public ;-)</p>
<p>The first time I read those two lines of the dress code I didn’t know whether to smile or roll my eyes.</p>
<p>On a separate note, thank you to all the parents who’ve included pop music references. Googling them has been a fabulous education from here on my pop culture island ;-)</p>
<p>I’m a bit surprised by this thread & the tone of the book. I know St. Paul’s fairly well and I know many students & families who attended SPS. Students major “complaint” about seated meals was that they were too short. The students tend to be very bright & hardworking, but also very sweet. I’ll try to get & read this book soon & offer some thoughts, but on the basis of what has been shared in this thread, I expect that my input will be much different. The author was well liked as a teacher & head of house while at SPS. For those for whom this book was a decisive factor regarding whether or not to entrust their child’s education to SPS, all I can say is that authors want to sell books and “All is well on the schoolfront” does not sell well. Sensationalism sells–just ask the publisher’s of tabloid newspapers.</p>
<p>I’ve visited many prep schools & many boarding schools over the decades and was most impressed by SPS, although I found attractive aspects in almost every school. I’m hesitant to write my true feelings on this matter because I haven’t read the book, but “gullible” comes to mind.</p>
<p>@Axelrod: Mike Hirschfeld said as much to me during a great chat we had at revisit two years ago. As did the outgoing Rector, Bill Matthews. But really, what else are they going to say.</p>
<p>Note that we did not make our choice based solely on info in the Khan book. In fact my daughter has never read it, but yet had a similar vibe (not a good one) as her mother and I about our revisit.</p>
<p>Maybe I should write a book on SPS. You’d be shocked at how sweet the kids are, although the girls hazing incident did occur. Anything you read, for example, about Bishop Anderson is almost total BS & exaggerations. When he was Rector, the Board of Trustees–including the Chairman–were very worried about losing him. The NYT hack job was done by a friend of a staff member who was upset that Bishop Anderson carried out instructions from the Board to streamline the administrative hierarchy at SPS. Several high ranking, highly paid positions were eliminated because they were unnecessary (essentially SPS had about 5 heads of school with an enrollment of about only 500 kids). Several faculty members lost cushy, well paid positions in this consolidating move to streamline the administration. Bishop Anderson was one of the most beloved Heads of School and among the kindest, most sincere persons I’ve ever known.</p>
<p>SevenDad: Your posts about SPS are usually quite glowing, so I’m a bit confused by the inconsistency. Regardless, you have to go with your gut in these type of decisions.</p>
<p>P.S. I don’t understand your last post, but there is no need for anyone to advocate for a boarding school without substantial experience with that particular school. And please don’t take that as anything but as a respectful comment made in respnse to your post above.</p>
<p>Axelrod, you should definitely read the book. Based on how Khan characterizes the students’ openness with him I’m not surprised to hear that he was popular with the students. But I also didn’t feel like he had very warm feelings for the students. He often sounds mocking and contemptuous, to me. I’m curious to hear what you think.</p>
<p>I’ll try to read it this week. I contacted a few students who attended SPS while he was teaching & acting as a houseparent there. They all stated that he was well liked.
SPS is an interesting community. Warm & generous, yet filled with extremes in terms of family wealth. I can write with absolute confidence that few, if any, SPS students “skimp on academics” as the second post in this thread shares as a claim made in the book. At one time a few Ivy League schools sent folks over to study the SPS humanities program because SPS students who matriculated at those Ivies were doing extremeley well during their first year in college.</p>
<p>I just finished Khan’s book. SPS provides many opportunities, but reading the book did not make me want to send my children to SPS. If the author had written the book about another elite prep school, such as Andover or Exeter, would his impressions be the same? I understand this is a speculative question.</p>
<p>I think it would have substantively been the same, although some of the specific situations (like Chapel and seated meal) would have been different. I think that SPS has more daily school-wide structure than Andover (because of things like Chapel and Seated) and therefore there are more opportunities for the school’s culture to emerge. I don’t think that Khan’s attitude towards the students or faculty, which I found extremely patronizing, would be different at any other prep school.</p>