Page Six’s headline story today is a curious one about how Matt Damon couldn’t get his three youngest daughters into one of New York’s most exclusive private schools, an arts school in Brooklyn called St. Ann’s. The school boasts alumni including Ethan Hawke, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Zac Posen. Apparently Damon and his family are moving back to New York from LA after three years on the west coast and needed to make plans for the girls’ education. They’re not going to St. Ann’s though because the school just does not make exceptions to their application process, not even for celebrities. Damon has previously admitted that he sends his daughters to private school, although his own mother was a public schoolteacher and he’s an advocate of public school, because the “kind of progressive education [he received] no longer exists in the public system.” He’s also spoken out against standardized testing and tying teacher salaries to test results. Here’s Page Six’s story:
Damon is moving his family back to New York after a stint in LA — but has been summarily rebuffed by St. Ann’s, one of the city’s most exclusive schools.
Insiders tell Page Six that the Brooklyn Heights school…. has told Damon that its classes for next year are fully booked.
We’re told [Damon] was hoping that three of his daughters with wife Luciana Barroso — Isabella, 10, Gia, 7, and Stella, 5 — could [attend] the venerable institution.
“They had a conversation with the school, but St. Ann’s just won’t bend the rules,” said an insider. “They don’t care [who the parents of its students are]. A lot of schools will bend the rules very happily; they’ll bring celebrities’ kids in midway through the year or do whatever they want. St. Ann’s just isn’t doing it.”
The school, with tuition that runs between $36,080 and $42,555 per year depending on the grade, offers classes from pre-K through high school and says on its website, “So that every child will flourish, we eschew grades, rankings and prizes in favor of ongoing dialogue and teacher reports.”
The move will be something of a homecoming for the family. When they upped sticks for the West Coast in 2013, Damon said on “Today” that it had been a tough decision to relocate.
“Basically all of our friends with little kids are out there [in LA],” he said. “We’re a little conflicted. We love it here, we’re really happy here and New York will always be here. It might just turn out to be a little jaunt out there and then a return . . . It’s hard to leave here.”
Given how important education is to Damon this was probably a big setback for them. This also begs the question – why is Damon moving? Is it for his career, are they sick of LA and/or has he grown apart from Ben Affleck? He lives right down the street from Affleck, who may or may not have been crashing at Damon’s guest house for a while if you believe the tabloids. Now that Affleck is separated or not separated or whatever he’s doing (he probably doesn’t even know), I would bet that his relationship with happily married Damon has changed too.
Getting back to this story, I’m of two minds about it. One, that it’s refreshing that there’s an institution that doesn’t bend over backwards for celebrities and upholds its process, but two if it’s that exclusive and expensive, does it turn out special snowflakes? Maybe I just read that Lena Dunham is a graduate and thought “of course.”
photos credit: FameFlynet
Ben’s great friendship with Matt never had a thing to do with the wives, so I don’t see how it would change just because Ben is getting a divorce and Matt is happily married. It seemed Ben saw a ton of Matt without Jennifer with him. Sports and working on their projects is a big bond for them.
I think Matt once said he would eventually go back to NYC. He moved when they put bids on homes in NYC they wanted and were outbid. Then he decided he wanted his children to grow up playing with his best friends’ kids, Ben and Casey, having a childhood bond like he did with the Affleck boys. Plus, he became great friends with John and Emily. And he wanted his children to enjoy a big yard, is another reason he thought it would be fun in California, etc. But they are all off doing movies in other places. Matt took his family to live in China and also in England when filming. So they probably weren’t around at the same time much anyway in California as time went on.
I think it just ran its course and he wanted to be back in NYC. And John Krasinski and Emily Blunt moved to NYC last year.
I think Ben and Matt are still very tight. It sure appears that way by the way Matt still talks about him. And they have so many projects they work on together and many more they want to do.
I don’t pretend that I’ve seen every single paparazzi pic ever, but I don’t really recall any pics of Luciana Damon spending any time with Jennifer Garner on their own or with their kids on play dates. And it seems that they both enjoy working out at the gym and have girls around the same age, so what gives? We know that Matt will always, always be Team Ben in any given situation so maybe Jen isn’t a huge fan of Matt & co?
I don’t think Lucy and Jen were close on their own. To be fair, you never see any of Matt’s kids on playdates. I’m sure it’s private playdates and that Ben’s kids do have playdates with them, going down the street to each other’s homes (before the big split). That’s stuff you never see in pap strolls. I know the Afflecks spent Thanksgiving with them when they couldn’t get back to her hometown. I imagine they hung out at each others’ homes for barbecues and the kids playing since they lived in the same neighborhood. And that would include Casey Affleck. Casey and Matt are very tight also.
I think they did things together as family get-togethers, not Jen and Lucy on their own. But as a couple with chemistry, for Matt and Lucy, it was Emily Blunt and John Krasinski that was that couple. Lucy and Emily really seemed to hit it off from what I read, and John and Matt are friends and wrote a movie together. So those two couples did a lot together socially. You would see photos of them out to dinner often. There was one time there was a photo of all three couples out to dinner.
They do have playdates together. There were photos of both families arriving at each others houses for pool dates, Ben and Jennifer taking Matt’s kids to a museum (with Ben kissing one of Matt’s kids on the head), Jen, Matt and Lucy at a pumpkin patch/farm in LA, and so on.
edit
@Jayna, who wrote: “I think they did things together as family get-togethers, not Jen and Lucy on their own. But as a couple with chemistry, for Matt and Lucy, it was Emily Blunt and John Krasinski that was that couple. Lucy and Emily really seemed to hit it off from what I read, and John and Matt are friends and wrote a movie together. So those two couples did a lot together socially. You would see photos of them out to dinner often. There was one time there was a photo of all three couples out to dinner.”
The Damons are also very close to the Hemsworths (Chris and Elsa), with whom they have gone on family vacations and seem to hang out with a lot.
@Jayna
Do you happen to know why Jen garner and Lucy never hit it off? My own suspicion was always that Jen found it hard to see Matt’s loyalty to his wife in contrast to the way Ben treated her.
Or it could just be as simple as their personalities just aren’t as compatible. There are certain spouses of friends that I’m closer to than others. In a group setting where we’re all together, we all get along great but I wouldn’t do something individually with some like I would with others. It doesn’t mean I don’t like them, just that we aren’t as close. Thankfully there’s no law that says the wives of good friends HAVE TO become best buddies with each other or I would have gone to jail, lol!
@Lucky Charm
True! I just thought it would be hard to see Matt treat his wife the way she wished Ben could treat her. Salt in the wound kind of. Than again, my projecting skills about celebrities suck and half the time what I guess is 100% off the mark. I keep plugging away though, lol.
Jen seems like the kind, that doesn’t have too many many female friends, she seems like the type who is in competition with you and not genuine.
@cindy, there are rumours that Matt is no better than Ben, he is just much more discreet.
Eh but it’s that thing were your bestie becomes single and then you wanna play at being single too
Send them to another private school in New York and wait for admissions to re-open for the next-next school year. This is what most people have to do.
Exactly.
In fairness, I am sure that would be exactly what they are doing. Still you don’t know if a school is going to let your kids in when you are out of the general application time unless you ask. I kind of feel like this is a non-story. Yes some exclusive schools let celebrity kids in outside the general admission time, but they also let in others too sometimes, depends on year and school. Wonder who let this out, just seems odd. Doubt Damon would let it out, because if his girls do go there at some point gives the impression they couldn’t get in earlier, plus he is so private with his kids doubt he would let out info about their school. If it is the school it is an invasion of privacy.
My kids’ urban school has a limit–can only enroll 400 kids. Hard and fast rule based on zoning. Budgets are set using exactly that number and deposits are due in the early summer. So it’s just not a possibility to add three kids midway through the summer, celebrity or not.
I really think it’s all going to be ok…
😂😂
Oh, please…..
I really love watching Matt Damon’s movies, but Matt is as much of a phony as some other famous people.
He supports the public school system, just not for his children…and what’s wrong with teachers accountability?
Accountability is fine. What’s wrong with our current setup is that it uses teacher accountability as a shield in order to ignore larger systematic issues like urban poverty, lack of funding, or special education needs that effect the educational progression of our students. What this has resulted in is a system where children are taught to pass tests rather than learn creatively and innovate.
I’m not 100% against testing because you do need some sort of measurement. But I am opposed to teacher salaries to the end result instead of say overall improvement or a mix of things. My mom and sister are both public school teachers who have worked in more than one state and to them that is a significant issue, particularly if you are working in Title I schools. The other issue is that now teachers are taught to teach to the test. Children memorizing answers is often faster than being able to truly understand the problem they’re solving. They’ve seen many teachers take that short cut and given the situation, it’s hard to blame them. They need to support themselves.
I cannot stand that school curriculum has become “teaching to the test.” My daughter starts Kindergarten in two weeks and I’m hoping that there are some improvements made to the school system by then. Teachers are really between a rock and a hard place because of the significant lack of funding, especially in Title I schools, like you said. I’m always happy to “fill the bus” and donate school supplies and backpacks when I am able, because I know some students can truly not afford these things and teachers often have to dig into their own pockets to replenish the supplies. I understand that Matt makes a lot of money and can afford to send his children to private schools, and that is absolutely his right, but I can see why some would find this hypocritical.
It’s not really about accountability, although that’s what the argument for states. The resources are limited, and the amount of data these teachers are supposed to cram into a kid’s head is vast (and growing). This encourages aone size fits all approach to teaching. As we know, that is not the case.
So very many things are wrong with public education. I was a teacher for 8 years and had to get out. In my short career, standardized testing went from a benchmark measure to being used as a tool for teacher accountability and pay. Standardized tests are not the enemy. Having hard data by which to evaluate student growth isn’t bad. It can be very helpful when used as a tool. However, policy makers, most of which have zero experience or expertise in education, have created an environment where school IS testing. There is no reason for a kindergartener who has been in school less than 6 months to be taking any kind of standardize assessment. Third graders should not be having test anxiety because they’re so afraid of failing a test that may determine their ability to move on with their classmates. Furthermore, teachers are no longer treated as highly qualified professionals by systems, politicians, even parents. They are treated as little more than “overpaid” babysitters.
It’s no wonder public education is broken. But it doesn’t have to be. Meaningful assessment is a great tool, but teachers need time to teach problem solving, critical thinking, and general life skills too. Kids who can regurgitate rote facts aren’t much use to the work force. Public education policy is doing kids and teachers a massive disservice.
Veronica is right, imo. Accountability is the fair standard we hold teachers to based on training, experience, competency and efficacy. But when the playing field is not level and teachers are outgunned, so to speak, by policy and thrown under the rhetorical bus then we have to examine the metrics by which educators are held accountable.
As for Damon being a hypocrite, how so? If he criticized the public school system and left his children in it then he would be a lousy parent, imo. He is doing what he and his wife feel is best for their childrens’ education and they happen to have the money to do so. What makes him the opposite of a hypocrite is the fact that he champions improvements in the public education system in a way that doesn’t directly benefit him. And his tax dollars are supporting the public schools even though his children do not attend.
As the others said, there is nothing wrong with teacher accountability. Using a students test scores and/or grades of your students is not the way to do it. The problem with using student test scores (for the NCLB tests and other state tests) is that the only ones being held accountable are the teachers – at least in the state where I taught for 30 years. The students have no accountability at all for their scores and some students will never do well on a test due to various reasons. Some school districts give awards for those students who achieve a certain level on the test. This works only so far to encourage the children to do well. When they hit the high school level, awards mean very little to most students and so they don’t care how well they do on the tests – even those who are at the top of their class. I’ve seen very intelligent students do poorly on these tests because they have no meaning for them. As Veronica says, teacher accountability is used to masked other problems with the education system and they are numerous.
I have nothing against teacher accountability, but the current system where “accountability” is tied to test scores does several things which do not help education. First the test system is greatly flawed. We are teaching straight to a standardized test now. As funding is tied in most areas to these results. A lot of students are just learning how to take a test. Application of the knowledge, if they retain it at all, may be elusive. Plus some are just not good at taking tests. The test points have been discussed endlessly, with some bias in test creation along with other issues, but I do understand the importance of trying to find out exactly how much a student has learned. Still relying only on standardized tests are a poor way to do this.
Second and most important, if you are a teacher and your living is tied to the test results of your students , what is an intelligent teacher going to do in order to stay employed and earn raises. They are going to steer themselves to the students with the most chance of success. This means children who have been the least served and most in need will receive teachers who may not be best equipped to help them learn. Now we do have a lot of teachers who probably would still want to try and teach the ones who need them most, but in fairness if you have years where you get told your results aren’t good enough you are either going to give up, perhaps believing the assessment, or go another route mainly because of the system we have created. Merit raises are fine, but we need to define what we consider to be merit better, and a standardized test which changes every few years trying to get the right “formula” is not the right way.
Bingo. “We are teaching straight to a standardized test right now. As funding is tied in most areas to these results. A lot of students are just learning how to take a test.”
Exactly! It just become rote memorization and we have no idea if these children are really absorbing what they are being taught. They right in a certain way on these tests because it is drilled into them, but some of this style of writing has absolutely no real world application.
*Gasps* What?? You mean to tell me that “the Every man”, married to a civilian Matty D tried to use his celeb status to get the rules bent? Maybe he should’ve named dropped Brad Pitt’s name to help things along. You know, since that seems to be his go to move.
Isn’t Matt Damon the guy who a couple years ago was doing a bunch of campaigning about public schools and stuff? I remember him doing a whole bunch in his home state in response to Republicans trying to push through vouchers and other stuff.
So maybe Matt should practice what he preaches and enroll his kids in public school. If he wants to be consistent and all.
So if I campaign for better working conditions in factories I should make my children work in one to prove a point? I’m not sure using your children to appear ‘consistent’ is in their best interest.
Your analogy doesn’t work, since a child should not be working in a factory. They should not be working at all (we did away with child labor, remember?)
And no child should be in a sub-standard public school system. We should have done away with those years ago, as well. fwiw children can be adults too although I think the point of the analogy was not lost.
But it is. A factory is a job. Child labor is now largely illegal in the US, so you would not have the option of sending your child to one even if you wished to do so. So yes, the analogy fails on its face. All children are mandated to receive an education; none of them are mandated to work in a factory.
Snarkweek,
Matt Damon can afford to buy a home in the best neighborhoods with the best public schools. New York and Long Island have a lot of schools that top national lists, and he could no doubt buy a house that would allow him to enroll his kids in one of those schools – something most of us can’t necessarily do. If that is STILL sub-standard for Matt’s children, should the rest of us just give up on our children right now?
@Sam,
I think the idea was that if someone campaigns for better factory working conditions, it does not mean they must push their GROWN children work in a factory. The assumption is that, like all children must go to school, all (or almost all) adults must work somewhere.
The fact remains that he would then be doing what others think is best for his family. In this case Damon wants people who don’t have as much money as he does to not have to put their children in substandard schools.
Especially in the kind of neighborhood he could afford to live in. Best schools in the world.,
Firstly find a more inclusive school, your kids will be better for it Matt. Secondly, where are the people who were saying that Jeremy Renner could get their daughter into any school Sonni wants for her without the pre_k. If you want in to certain schools, you need to get every single duck in a row, even when you are Jason Bourne (or just the actor who fills in when Damon has better things to do than be in a Bourne film)
This is trying to get them into a school after enrollment has closed, not the same situation as Renner.
Don’t worry about Ben not having a couch to crash on when he gets sick of the guest house. He still has his girlfriend’s apartment. I feel sorry for Matt’s kids. How many times have they been uprooted? Their moves don’t seem to have any real reasoning behind them, it was just, “oh let’s try LA,” now it’s “let’s try NYC again.” Isn’t his stepdaughter 15/16? How much would it suck to have to finish your last year or two of hs in a new school and city?
Your comment got me thinking. Maybe it’s for the eldest daughter that they are leaving LA. I wouldn’t want to try and raise kids there, all the doors open because you’re the offspring of a d-list star. Such a weird place. New York is more exclusive, more money, different social codes. Actors are not top dog there, maybe it’s a good thing to have people say no to your kids. Just my thoughts today:)
Uh, Matt is hardly what I would call a D-List actor…
Matt is d-list???
No Matt’s not but Brody Jenner or a couple of the Stewart kids. Do people the either of those parents have that much money or influence. I would be wary of my kid being around that nonsense. I was also was just thinking that a private school may be more flexible with remote tutores if they travel or arrangements with other schools who teach kids for part of the year.
Matt was one celebrity I always thought was overrated in terms of his looks as well as his persona as this openminded liberal intellectual. Rich people are always doing things that are hypocritical and rich white men almost always live in their own bubble. Examples: His whitesplaining Effie Brown, sending his own children to the most elite private schools, and becoming the stereotypical white savior in a movie about ancient China. This guy is just like George Clooney in that they like to toot their own horn and bloviate about issues to make themselves appear smarter than most celebrities, but in reality are not much smarter than you or I or anyone else with an upper middle class upbringing or a college education.
And even though this won’t be popular I will say I was never impressed with his marriage even if it appears happy on the outside. It’s just like Prince William marrying Kate Middleton. Basically, I expected better, but I won’t say more. Apparently a lot of these guys prefer to marry women who won’t be able to run circles around them.
Same! I just don’t get his appeal at all. Very average looks, okay acting talent but nothing special.
My word for the day! Bloviate! Thank you @Kibbles – absolutely love it!
Yup, both annoying and entitled mansplainers.
on a forum years ago, someone said that MD looks like he has “bologna breath.” I can’t unsee that.
I feel the same way. He is ok as an actor but he tries so hard to sound like an intellectual during interviews but the receipts just don’t match, in my opinion of course.
Excellent post, kibbles.
I have to say he looks quite adorable with his gaggle of girls. But, yeah, I’m happy the school won’t bend the rules. So sick of celebrities getting preferential treatment for no good reason. Now I could get on board with cancer researchers getting preferential treatment or, say, public school teachers…
It nowhere says he tried to bend the rules. It’s okay to ask, and if the answer is no, you move on. All of us parents ask, but most of us aren’t celebrities with right-wing newspapers gunning for us.
Presumably he was aware of the annual application deadline, so, in inquiring, he was seeing if they would bend the rules. And, I’m sure, hoped the “Hello, this is Matt Damon” would sway admissions. Otherwise, why wouldn’t his SAHM wife make the call?
In fairness, I am not a celebrity and I asked outside the application deadline for an exclusive private school too. I was told no too. Funny thing was they told me if I had come a week earlier they could have accommodated us. Believe it or not even exclusive schools have people come in and out especially when the deadlines are usually in Jan-Feb for a Fall start. Life happens and people leave, also asking and looking around the school is a good idea there is always next year too.
They have 4 kids. They live their lives according to the school year. And they didn’t think about admission deadlines when contemplating a move? Please. They thought it woudn’t be a thing because he’s Matt Damon. Which makes me cackle. Loudly.
Sometimes admission deadlines can be up to a year before a child starts at a school. They may not have decided to move until after those deadlines have passed.
Supporting public schools but sending his kids to private ones makes him a hypocrite. Private schools are morally wrong. End of.
Especially when there are some very fine ones in Brooklyn et al, no?
Private schools are morally wrong? So we were wrong to send our girls to a school that actively championed diversity and inclusion and where the girls could receive religious instruction just because that school is private? Okay.I guess we should have sent them to the school designated for them by the district – where a teacher was fired for racially profiling one of the student-athletes and where the students aren’t reprimanded for racial and homophobic slurs. Gotcha.
@locke lamora…may I ask why you think private schools are morally wrong? If I’m paying taxes to help support public schools, but desire and can afford private for my kids, where is the problem? I’m genuinely puzzled why you feel that way
Morally wrong. Wow that is harsh. My child has gone to both public and private schools over the years, and now is going back to a private school. Main difference CLASS SIZE!!!!!! The public school she would be going to has over 2200 students with an average class size of 32, and it is ranked very well in the state and country, but still would be an issue for her at this point as she is on the younger side for her grade and really would get lost in the school. I have the money to find a better fit for her so I am doing it. Not every child fits into every school. I can’t fault anyone for trying to find the best atmosphere for their child to grow and thrive. Still it makes me sad to think people are not willing to pay a bit extra in taxes to help the next generation thrive. A class size that is averaging that large, facilities that haven’t been updated, and let’s not even talk about how some of the buildings are falling apart, and these are just a few of the reasons some choose private schools.
How are they morally wrong? My daughter attends a private school because it is important to us that she receive, in addition to regular studies, theological instruction. That type of thing is not allowed in our public schools here. When I grew up, my father demanded that I attend a private school that had a curriculum based around Native American studies where I would actually have a chance to be exposed to my indigenous culture. But according to you, that’s morally wrong – Heavens forbid that minority children be able to receive an education that centers them at some point! The immorality of me being allowed to hear my indigenous language, learn my indigenous history, religion, customs, etc. How awful!
Your comments come off as extremely privileged and dismissive of the myriad of reasons why parents would select a private school.
Private schools are NOT morally wrong. End of. Are the Obamas hypocrites for sending their girls to private schools?
Actually, I’ve always thought that the Obamas, and the Clintons, were hypocrites on this issue.
“We support public schools 100%. But not for OUR children.”
Yes. Hypocrites.
Sarah – a public school would be a security nightmare for a President’s child here. I think Jimmy Carter tried it and it seemed awfully rough on the kid. The Obama children would especially have been sitting ducks – people wanted to kill their father and freely expressed that sentiment, so much so that I was surprised he was still alive to run for a second term. Chelsea Clinton would have been subjected to the awful stuff people were saying about her when she was a child, just because they didn’t like her father. Really, I wouldn’t put a child through that myself. Their parents chose schools that were safer physically and emotionally. The very small classes involved in such private schools make it much easier to nip bad behavior in the bud and stop bullying before it starts, as well as making the Secret Service’s job much easier.
I am not judging all parents for sending their kids to private schools, I’m sure there can be valid reasons. But segregating children based on their parent’s income, in something as crucial as education is morally wrong. Maybe not by the individual, but the system is definitely morally wrong. You are indirectly aiding a system that favours rich children.
And yes, I think politicians should make a point of sending their kids to public schools, so the Obamas should have sent their daughters to public schools.
@Locker Lamora
I wouldn’t have the guts to put it like you did, but I agree with you philosophically.
I am honestly puzzled by people who feel the need to put their kids into a private school just for theological reasons. Education is education, 2+3 = 5, whether you’re an atheist, a Christian, or a Muslim. America has SO many churches, so many opportunities to grow religiously, why would it be so important for someone to make sure that their kids are exposed to it non-stop? Surely it’s not because a public school may mention Darwin and say “happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”? And what about religious diversity? In our day and age, being able to talk to people of other faiths, to debate respectfully, not to reduce a huge religious population to a few extremists is so important.
I am far more understanding of parents who send their kids to private school for class size and/or developmental issues (I had 1 friend who had to children with autism/developmental delays, and she sent them to a tiny school that specialized in that – this I get).
Except if you think that private schools only favor wealthy children, you are sorely mistaken. Many of the (especially religious) private schools in my area are funded through the larger religious orders, which often have mandates to help the poor. My school growing up was run by a religious order that sought out Native American kids to give us a place where we could (God forbid!) learn and engage in our indigenous culture. Our tuition was subsidized by the order and by private donors and also the tribal councils. We paid a small stipend for supplies. The school was fairly bare bones, but it worked for us.
There’s a private school a few blocks from my house that is centered around the Yoruba community here (they are pretty sizable around me). It’s a school open to all, but it centers around providing a safe environment centered around educating Yoruba kids about their heritage, religion, culture, etc. But somehow, that offends you. Oh, and do you know why it exists? Because there was a huge dustup about Yoruba kids getting attacked and ostracized in the “diverse” public school. There’s also a Muslim private academy near us. It also started because Muslim kids, in that same lovely “pluralistic” public school routinely got harassed, including having their religious headwear snatched from them and getting pork thrown at them.
And please, spare me about diversity. Even in alleged “diverse” environments, dominant cultures tend to push to the top. Ever seen the studies of minority students who don’t feel safe in alleged “diverse” schools? If you had, maybe you’d understand the need for private schools that can cater to the ethnic, religious or other needs of marginalized groups.
If all you can think of when you hear “private school” is wealthy kids, then you are in a bubble and have no idea about the extent of private education in America.
Religion has no place in schools, and learning about one’s community or heritage could be done trough sunday schools or extraculicular activity.
Schools that cater to certain groups of people can be achieved in a public way. The fact that they have to be private shows a flaw in the system. Again, I am saying that the system is flawed. And wealthy, rich, white men like Damon are hypocrites
Oh honey, I can’t believe I’m saying this, but you might be the whitest person I’ve ever met with that mess.
So please, sit down, because I’m about to blow your mind:
Right now, this is the most peak White Privilege thing I’ve ever heard. Cultural education can happen on the weekends? Honey, please. You could only think that if you’re white. Because, see, here’s the thing: EUROPEAN history is a standardized part of the history curriculum in all 50 states. Your white self sat in your little social studies and history classes and got to learn all about your history, your culture, your background. But African history, Indian history, Asian history, Native American history, Middle Eastern history, Latino history – is a postscript. We only get mentioned when we interact with white people. Cultural studies DO happen in public schools – but since you are privileged enough to exist within the dominant race, you just don’t notice it. And THAT is the definition of white privilege you seem to embody so easily. If your not white, you gotta go study your own history on your own time. Whitey just has to go to school for that – no extra investment needed. You claim to believe in equality, but that ain’t equal, is it? But see, it’s okay because you get yours, so it’s okay!
Then you get the HS and gotta take a language. And what’s offered? Spanish (high Spanish, mind you – the Spanish of Spain, which is white), French, German, Italian, etc. The languages of the colonizers. This is true even if the school is mostly non-white! What would you say to black students wanting to ditch those languages in favor of Yoruba, Swahili, Arabic, etc.? Oh, I forgot, you’d tell them to do it on the weekends, since, you know, it’s all right cause its all white.
That’s my problem with you on this thread. I don’t even have to see you to know your race. It’s evident. You simply can’t understand why a group that is routinely erased from history, compelled to speak the languages of people that exploited them, etc. could POSSIBLY want to opt out of the system. But that’s because it never happened to you and yours. A “public” school is funded by the tax dollars of all citizens – so theoretically, they should represent the educational needs of all students. And the UN, unlike you, states that access to one’s indigenous history, culture, and yes, as much as it pains you, religion, is a HUMAN (not civil) right that schools should further, since those people pay for the school, after all. But hey, since you already have those things, why bother? Like I said, its all right cause its all white.
I am very white from a very white country with almost no diversity whatsoever. In my country private schools are exclusively for rich people, and the idea of a cultural need for private education had not occured to me because, as I said, pretty much everyone here is of the same ethnicity, same religion, same race. And the people who are not are able to recieve education in their language, history etc. within the system. I apologise for projecting my experience onto everyone. My wording might have been too harsh, but I think you missunderstood me. I am not saying that people can’t have valid reasons to send their kids to privae schools. But the fact that in order to learn about their history, or any history other than the dominant one, especially in a country as diverse as the US people have to go to a private school, because that kind of education cant be recieved within the system is wrong. And priviledged, white, rich people like Matt Damon are just aiding the system by sending their kids to fancy private schools.
I still think religion has no place in schools.
Sam: Locke is Eastern European. She is speaking from the (privileged) position of living in a country where the standard of state education EXCEEDS that of private education. She is looking aghast at the US system where commodification entrenches unfairness in both directions (rich people can buy a better education; poor people in poor areas get teaching to the test and not a decent education).
Sitting where I sit, in the UK, where our current government is proceeding rapidly to emulate the US one, I wholeheartedly agree with her.
It’s not the fault of individual parents. It is the fault of the system.
And it would probably help the US system if Americans educated themselves about better systems and then went on to pressure their politicians and vote for a better system for their own children.
Sixer: If Locke is Eastern European, then she should be fully aware of their own issues with ethnic and racial minorities – particularly the Romani. And she should know that the UN has declared the treatment of them in most European nations to be a human rights violation. This includes not allowing them access to education in the public schools pertaining to their cultural, religious and language backgrounds. So yes, it happens there as well. You just have to look it up. The UK, frankly, isn’t doing much better. You’ve got sizable ethnic minorities that are not adequately represented in the public system. So while I’m talking about the US system in particular, my points stand validly anywhere.
I am Southeastern European, and the Roma comunity in my country us very small. Their education however, is a very complicated issue, but surely not solvable by private education.
Sixer, I completely agree with you.
But that wasn’t my point. You know why the Roma community is so small, right? The UN report is pretty damning; it’s because of large scale persecution and discrimination against them. There’s a family of them near me, and the stories they have are brutal.
I would love it if public schools could fully address the needs of all students. But I’m a realist who gets that such a thing is largely not possible – particularly when the dominant culture resists efforts to make it more diverse or culturally sensitive. That’s my problem with what you’ve said. You are obviously a member of the dominant culture where you are. That doesn’t make you a bad person; it just means that you haven’t experienced concepts like erasure or marginalization based on race or ethnic identity, religion, or language. A public school will, by default, represent the dominant culture that created it. I do not believe a minority group should have to just say “well we aren’t represented here but those other kids are, oh well.” Whether you know it or not, the schools DO teach culture, history, language, etc. They just only do it for dominant groups. That’s what I took issue with.
So until public schools can get their crap together, I support the rights of the marginalized to educate their own through private education. I don’t need a white person splaining to me about how bad that is. Because you can’t know how it felt to be in the position to need it.
Sam – you’re missing Locke’s point. She is simply saying that PRIVATE EDUCATION is not the answer to the problems you outline. In fact, the proliferation of private education as a response to failures in state education makes things worse and entrenches the very injustices being fought against.
I agree with her. Teaching to the test, as is happening in US and UK state systems doesn’t improve standards. It devalues the professionals in an important public service. It removes opportunities from the non-dominant culture’s children. All it actually does is turn the important public service of state education into a profit centre for large corporations such as Pearson.
And this isn’t just bad for the marginalised sections of the community. It’s bad for the country as a whole because pools of potential talent and drivers of future economic growth get sacrificed.
Not fighting for a decent state system and turning private simply cherry picks a few children whose parents can afford to get them out of it. But that action doubles down the problems for all the thousands who can’t. You can’t, as Locke repeatedly said, blame the individual parents. But you can, as a citizen, recognise the truth of that and fight for meaningful change.
It is worth mentioning the Roma, but if you’re going to do that, you might look at Croatia specifically to see how their response to this minority compares to other European countries. And it compares well. There is a dedicated government department for minorities, including the Roma. There are dedicated social assistance programs, which include cultural and artistic support. They have a dedicated seat in the parliament.
It might not be enough. But the fact remains that Locke is sitting in a country that is providing a more just education system than the US in every way, including for minorities. So, if you want to improve the lot of education in the US, it would perhaps be better to fully inform yourself rather than shout ignorant at her.
Locke – this is where the individualism of the US vs the communitarianism of many European countries comes into play. Culturally speaking, one side here sees the basic unit as the individual and the other sees the basic unit as society.
Locke- Religion has no place in public schools, but definitely the curriculum doesn’t suffer when included in a private school. I went to Catholic parochial schools and also a private Catholic high school. (My brother went to the public high school and said bluntly that it would not be a good idea for me. Public schools tolerate behavior that Catholic schools typically do not, so it can be a kinder, gentler experience in certain ways.) Religious matters were included in the curriculum (that does not mean praying away the day – there is a lot of detail in Catholic history and theology) and the schedule permitted attendance at a daily Mass (and eating a packed breakfast at our desks when it was a morning Mass). We still learned everything the kids in public school learned, we simply also learned about our parents’ religion. Not all the teachers were even Catholic.
The Catholic parochial schools here are often considered a good option for non-Catholic children as well, since in lower income areas they are often so much better than the public schools but at low enough or subsidized cost. In some inner city areas, half the students might be non-Catholic. Their parents feel they receive a better education and most importantly that the teachers will have high expectations for them (low expectations of minority students has always been a big problem in schools, another reason Catholic schools were developed – the public schools thought Catholic immigrant kids were intrinsically stupid). Even Catholic private schools are likely to have quite diverse students of different income levels. We moved around so I was in two private Catholic high schools. The private ones did have some rich kids, usually troubled souls dumped there by their neglectful parents (both had a boarding option, most kids were commuters but the rich kids were typically boarders). But most of the kids were from much lower income families like me. The tuition costs were kept very low and there were subsidies.
The class sizes were much smaller than in the public school, which is a major factor in favor of private schools here. Hiring enough teachers to keep classes small is something that will always help the public schools also, but our public schools are supported by property taxes and people don’t vote to increase those. This is why public schools can be so bad in poor areas. How bad, you ask? A friend of my mother’s had happily taught in a private school for many years but then needed to get a teaching job in New York City, not in a ritzy neighborhood There were bomb threats every day. Most kids rarely showed up for class. Those that did could barely read. It was pretty hopeless, and the hopelessness started way back in first grade and it was too late for most. He was just counting the days until retirement. At least he wasn’t knifed in the hallway (yes, that can happen). Really, our public schools can be such hellholes. But even the less violent ones may have serious problems that any parent would want to avoid for their child.
So religion and a good education can definitely co-exist. I’m a heretic as an adult but have never regretted my Catholic religious education. As a matter fact, having a mature understanding of that religion was helpful in deciding it wasn’t really my own framework as an adult. Also Catholic practice and history are rather interesting all by themselves. We can learn the basic skills utilizing any type of material, actually.
We do have to fight tooth and nail to keep religion out of public schools because otherwise the dominant religion here (Protestant Christians) will browbeat children into public prayer that is contrary to their own beliefs (this is a major conflict in the US and another part of the reason Catholic schools began). But that is not because religion is not a suitable part of the curriculum in general, so having private schools that include it is not wrong at all. People have a right to make sure their children learn about their own culture and history, including religion. Some do it via after-school programs, others through special schools. We just have to decide what we want future citizens to learn but then provide wider choices in how to get it, allowing parents to choose schools that are best for their own children.
Do you have kids? I don’t but I have a nephew so I understand the sentiment of why parents want their kids in private school.
And he would live where there are the best public schools in the world, with teachers who are actually certified, unlike most private schools (even the best) and with Masters degrees, as all teachers in NY state have a Masters.
He’s a phony.
Do teachers usually not have Masters degrees? Here you have to have a master’s in the subject you’re teaching.
Locke, NY is one of he few states that requires a Masters degree to teach. Most states just require a Bachelors degree.
Morally wrong? Let me guess, you’re in the UK, yes? It seems to be a larger issue in the UK than it is in the US.
Pretty much *everything* that costs money favours the rich. That’s the system. Posh Spice (Victoria Beckham) can afford to eat 100% organic. I cannot. Should she not eat this way, because I can’t? Life is unfair. People are born with terrible health issues. Should I not use my healthy lungs, (which I have through no effort of my own), because your lungs are damaged? (though if they are I am sorry and will continue to donate to cystic fibrosis charities)
Are you 100% socialist, or only when it comes to children’s education? Genuinely curious. Because I do disagree with you. And am doing everything in my power to make sure my children can go to private school. And when I can afford to eat 100% organic, I will.
We all do the best we can for our children. The wealthy can afford to do more -materially speaking. Thankfully there is a lot more to life than money. Especially when it comes to future success.
Just think of (insert Poor-person’s name here). He/She went on to (insert awesome achievement here) even though (insert disadvantage here).
That’s why its called triumph over adversity. Because adversity exists, and one can overcome it. Now. Whether or not adversity *should* exist, or why life is unfair… that’s a conversation to have between you and whatever higher power you may or may not believe in.
Life is unfair. Some people are healthy. Some people are rich. The rich have more. The healthy do not have to spend much time in hospitals.
Life.
My babies are going to private school 🙂
One can overcome adversity if they have the money, as you do, to get their kids into a better school. The privilege of money. It’s much harder to do in a failing school, while living in a dangerous neighborhood.
“Private schools are morally wrong.” Um, could you expand on that a little? That’s a very extreme and ignorant opinion.
Move to Finland and enroll them in one of their world class public schools. Or send them to a regular (upper middle class, amply funded) public school in suburban New York state. Didn’t Natalie Portman attend a public school?
Public schools in wealthy neighborhoods still provide an excellent education. I have friends who went to public schools in both wealthy and working class neighborhoods and have gone on to do great things. Some have gone onto ivy league schools while others have gone to decent in-state public universities and became doctors, pharmacists, teachers, lawyers, etc. Of course the quality of school matters, but even more so it depends on the individual and how much drive and motivation he or she has to study hard and do well. A lot of idiots go to private school as well, only difference is that they have parents with money and connections to finagle their way into decent colleges.
My son graduated from our pretty good public school and went to an Ivy League college where he did as well as his girlfriend who went to a 50k private high school in NYC. And he actually went to,school with some – gasp!- poor kids in high school!!!
I’ll take a good public school.
Cambridge Rindge & Latin is still standing, Matt. You could move back home and send them to the same schools you attended.
It is not clear to me why they were turned away– because they are enrolling late in the year? Anyway, I have read that Maggie Gyllenwhatever is a very very special (bitchy) snowflake so I think this is definitely a special snowflake school… but it does sound kind of cool too.
I can understand why a world famous celebrity would not want to send their kids to a public school. Might have less to do with the education and more to do with privacy. I don’t judge him for it, and I think it says a lot about him that even though he sends his kids to a private school, that he still advocates for a better public school system.
yeah, I can’t imagine being a regular middle class family inviting the Damon kids over. Do they need security? Could we just go to the park or out for ice cream? Would they be unintentionally snobby (I gave out of my kids favourite songs as their birthday party gifts and one spoiled little girl snotted ‘is that it?’ Yep sweetie – you already have everything). It’s not like Matt’s kids are ever going to hang out with middle class peers who have to worry about the workday, their paychecks and the cost of school supplies. I think part of the decision making for them is the per group their kids will be engaging with.
From what I have read they have not really been living in LA for about a year. Damon said they were in China for 6 months and then for a few months in the UK. Since they all move with him when he films (unlike Ben), maybe it did not make sense to be in LA any longer. I don’t think Ben’s divorce (or whatever you want to call it) weighed in on the situation. (Could you imagine if you felt you had to move because your best buddy’s marriage fell apart, though I think Matt might’ve on the record as not “approving” of Jen). As far as the schools, I’m sure he will find an exclusive school that will take them in.
They don’t always move with him, especially once his kids started school, which is basically what Jen said about Ben once. Jen said that once their kids started school, they couldn’t go spend a lot of time off with him on location anymore.
This year because of Matt’s schedule and China was a long shoot, they decided to do that, move there as a family, and then moved on to England, but their oldest daughter (his stepdaughter) stayed behind and didn’t go to England. The grandmother took care of her, he said. But he goes off and shoots movies without them as the kids have their lives and school. He has said in the past when he’s off shooting a movie they go no longer than two weeks apart, and either he flies home or they fly to see him. When he’s shooting not too far away, he said he can fly home ever weekend.
I thought Maggie gyllenhaal went to Harvard Westlake in LA
I’m more curious how this information leaked. Because I have a heard time believing it came from Camp Damon. More likely its the school that did it, so they could show how principled they are to reject some celebrity kids. But really, who does something crappy like that? The girls didn’t do anything wrong and this story makes them sound like rejects or something.
Maybe the nannies? Nannies always gossip amongst themselves.
Question – if fancy schools like St Ann’s don’t offer grades…then what do ivies and other posh universities use to evaluate students applying?
The name and address of the school. 😉
-The parents’ names and/or occupations.
-The amount written on the check of the (completely coincidental) donation to the school. This one in particular is no joke. Ivanka Trump’s husband Jared was not a great student in high school at all but his father made a large donation to Harvard the same year that he applied and he got in. There is actually an article or two about that on the web.
A friend from uni went to St Ann’s (fully disclosure she hated it and thought it was a waste of money with more wealthy hipsters than common sense), and the way they did evals for grades were “needs a lot of improvement” to “great”.
It’s a weird school…
I have a friend who went to St. Anne’s, too! (Fifteen years ago.) He didn’t like it much but said there were some excellent teachers, and that, despite the school’s rather ludicrous pretensions, there were some highly intelligent and interesting students, too. He’s FAR from a “special snowflake” type.
teachers recs become more important, along with standardized test scores and student essays
I went to St. Ann’s for 9 years and graduated from there in 1991. The classes are really small and the evaluations are not like needs improvement or great etc. They are long form mini essays about your strengths and weaknesses. The way St. Ann’s gets you into really great schools is not about bribery but that the kids are coming from a culture where learning, education, achievement, and the arts are prioritized by the schools and the families. So by the time you’re applying for colleges, with guidance from parents and schools, most likely your test scores are extremely high and the essays are extremely well written. It’s not like a phone call is made and poof you’re in!! It’s more like being in an environment where creativity and learning is nurtured in combination with having financial resources. There’s kind of this myth about these types of places that it’s just one phone call from daddy that makes all your dreams come true. But the truth is more complicated. As an aside St. Ann’s let’s in siblings and the kids of alumnae. So they do prioritize people but just not celebrities. It’s a lovely school, I had an amazing time there. And I feel really lucky that I didn’t have to deal with the soul crushing reality of most high schools.
I can’t blame him for sending his kids to private school if he can afford it. He’s right: public school is NOT the same as it was when I was growing up or even my older son was growing up (he went to public). I ended up taking my younger son out in first grade and homeschooling him (stand down – he’s totally socialized and we use a standard curriculum, and no it wasn’t even close to a decision made for religious purposes, we’re part of a secular co-op). I’m not saying public school is terrible or bad for kids who can fit within that structure, but it has definitely changed in recent years and it wasn’t working for my son. If I decide to put him back into a brick-and-mortar school, it probably would be private school. I have several public schoolteacher friends who applaud the decision to homeschool or use private school because they know what’s up. Also, a lot of them give me advice and pass on used textbooks 😀
Negotiating the NYC public school system is not a job for the faint-hearted. Elementary schools are zoned, middle schools get more scattered and can be selective, and high schools are both zoned and selective. Transitioning 4 kids at different levels to public school here is no joke. Plus each kid has her own needs and personalities. So it makes sense to try a small private school. I think St. Ann’s is more crunchy in their approach, they often have teachers whose kids are in the school, and they do some pretty advanced work in high school. So the kids tend to play to their strengths and turn out high-achieving student profiles elite colleges love.
We moved back to NYC when my (only) kid was in 7th grade, but I did my research (since I cannot afford private), found a great public 7-12 college prep school (selective) that matched my kid’s strengths and needs, had her write the entrance test in 6th grade, and she interviewed from overseas before our move…she was accepted, the IB program suited her, and we did a lot to try to fill the holes that the school could simply not afford (like science research). End result: she got into a selective school that has the fields she wants. But that’s a lot of work. You will not believe how few people can do this. Maybe I should set myself up as a school consultant!
Sounds similar to Chicago, so stressful to navigate and so many factors to consider. You should set yourself up as a consultant. In Chicago people are making big bucks with test prep companies/consulting gigs to prepare kids for the entrance exams. Talk about teaching to the test!
I find when someone home schools, there is more of a grudge with schools in general over religion or not being able to get your way with administration. And most kids coming to high school from home schools are unbelievably entitled and don’t know how to wait their turn for anything. Definitely taught they are special snowflakes.
I’ve taught in public schools for 25 years and many are better than they were 25 years ago.
Wow. Way to make assumptions based on your own anecdotal experience. First of all, he *is* MY special snowflake. I hate that saying because yes, my children are special to me. Second, I absolutely had no grudge whatsoever with the administration, in fact, I applauded his teachers and maintain friendships with them. I sought their advice and counsel on the decision to homeschool, which is entirely personal. As for entitled, waiting in line, etc, are you unfamiliar with what a homeschool co-op even IS? Sounds like you’re a little butt-hurt, and honestly probably not that great of a teacher with that attitude. No offense 😀
All kids are special. But home schoolers generally don’t want their kids associating with “those other kids.” They aren’t “special” enough for many homeschool moms. All sorts of fears. White privilege. Over-protecting. Religious protectionism.
I know lots of homeschool families and they are usually either really religious, homesteaders, end-of-the-world types or on another extreme in society.
And my 25 years of students would disagree that I’m not an awesome teacher. Talk about making assumptions! LOL! And then to follow up a pretty serious judgement with “No offense.” I hope you aren’t teaching your son about irony yourself. 😆
More and more public schools are eliminating grades.
That piece of information/news story sounded like a PR move from the school so maybe they thought that’s a win to reject a celebroty kid and run off and brag about their strict unbendable rules and hogh morale to the press
I wish we could just ban the term “special snowflake”. It’s just a dismissive term like “politically correct”, ignoring all the real issues and trying to silence other people. Besides, every child really is a “special snowflake” with their own needs and learning styles, as unique as all the snowflakes are alleged to be. Recognizing that and looking for the best schooling option for them doesn’t mean they are being raised to think they are the center of the universe.
Homeschooling has a bad rep only because of people like the Duggars. The homeschoolers I know do it because they feel their kids learn better that way. One family had an arrangement with a small Quaker school with an open format where the kids could spend one or two days a week there and the rest of the time at home. The mother said it was a lot of work. Nowadays they can easily work directly with the public school system, which provides materials and is beginning to have a home-schooling option where teachers are available via computer conferencing and the curriculum can be scheduled according to the child’s needs. It’s been a real lifesaver for kids who were having too much trouble in the typical large classroom with all its distractions or who just can’t sit still for long periods or who have other reasons for doing better with a more flexible schedule. If a parent can afford to stay home with them, the results can be wonderful and it doesn’t require that the parent have special teaching skills. Often arrangements can be made to have older children take some classes in the public school mixed with home schooling. There are many ways to “socialize” children, and quite frankly regular school experiences for me just encouraged my natural hermit-like tendencies…. I realized I really don’t like my own species from my school experiences! Even a good school can have students who make life miserable for others. Schools have traditionally done very poorly in controlling bullies and helping the bullied, although there are definitely those who are trying now.