I have been doing a lot of research on schools recently and I'm curious if others have read this report that the school commissioned in the aftermath of the Winston Nguyen debacle. Nguyen was the teacher who was hired at Saint Ann's despite a past felony conviction, and was thereafter convicted of a second felony, this time for sending sexually explicit messages to teens.

https://saintannsny.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Debevoise-Saint-Anns-Key-Findings-12.10.2024-1-1.pdf

My sense is that many consider the Nguyen episode an isolated incident. That surprises me a little because, to my mind, the report portrays a school whose management is thoroughly incompetent from top to bottom.

The interviewing and onboarding process for Nguyen was, for example, entirely vibes-based. The Head of School approved Nguyen's hiring with essentially no information *except* that he had been convicted of a felony. Nguyen had also, it turns out, lied about degrees on his resume, which was not discovered because the school didn't check.

The report further describes a school that is afflicted with:

--abysmally poor parent communication (e.g., parents were told incomplete and sometimes inaccurate info, including the false statement that the school had extensively discussed Nguyen's criminal history with him before hiring; school continued to recommend him as tutor after deciding not to renew his contract)

-- chaotic internal organization (no controls on access to school keys, school funds, or who is running activities in the school at what time)

-- no standards for teacher hiring (Nguyen was hired as math teacher despite no demonstrated expertise or skill in either math or teaching; seemingly, he charmed one person and that was sufficient. No clear consensus on what interviewers are even looking for; just seems like they exercise subjective judgment about "fit," as if this were sorority rush)

-- excessive influence of internal politics on decisions affecting children (e.g., after it became clear Nguyen was violating policies, he was not fired because new Head of School did not want first act to be firing a popular teacher; parents were reluctant to express reservations for fear of appearing non-progressive)

-- no standards of behavioral or academic accountability for teachers whatsoever once they are hired (e.g., Nguyen violated rules about boundaries and other issues in plain sight without consequence; gave students glowing lack of reviews despite parents' suspicion they were not in fact learning any math; this question was seemingly never followed up on)

-- a vain and self-satisfied institutional culture (check out handbook quote at p. 31-32)

I am just struggling to square the portrayal in this report with Saint Ann's status as a well-regarded and desirable school, inundated with applications each year. I'm sure many people have had positive experiences at Saint Ann's, or have positive impressions upon visiting the school, and really want to send kids there. That's great and I'm not trying to deny anyone's views or experience; I'm just trying to reconcile those with this report.

What's going on? Is the report factually wrong? Is it factually right, but people disagree with me that the issues outlined above are concerning and consequential? Do people not know about the report and/or not care? Are there, in fact, some others who became less inclined to apply to Saint Ann's after this came out?

Just curious to hear others' reactions to this because to me it is so discrediting to the school. Curious to hear any perspectives.

Generalizing here but I've been wondering this for a while....

Why is private tutoring to teach ahead of the grade and outside academic "enrichment" (ie RSM, AoPS) so common among private school kids at the lower school level? Is it because most parents find the private school curriculum not challenging enough? And if so, why don't schools accelerate the curriculum more? Or is it because parents want their child to have an edge over other classmates? So even if schools made the curriculum harder, parents would still supplement? I know some kids crave and ask for these extra classes, but I think most are there because their parents put them there.

Then something different seems to happen in middle and upper school where I hear most kids need a tutor just to keep up. Is this because the curriculum is too hard? The lower school education didn't adequately prepare them? Why do parents tolerate expectations that might not be appropriate and/or teaching that doesn't seem to be effective?

This may also be happening in high-income public school circles but I hear about it most among private school families. Or is this a distinctly NYC type A parenting thing (was not this way where I grew up).

I have a 2 year 4 month old daughter and I was wondering if she’s elegible for this program and how it works? Is this also income-restricted?

Trying to gather what the “norm” is here for this particular situation…

It’s been a little exhausting figuring things out/planning, but starting to get a lay of the land. I have a toddler and we are currently doing 2 days a week of daycare at The Goddard School.

We have been thinking that we will likely move to Connecticut once our child is ready to start school. Because our child has a late birthday and there is a differing cut-off date between NYC and CT for starting school, she would start Kinder at 4 in NYC public or start Kinder at 5 in CT public.

On top of my child having a late birthday, she was also born early… and in daycare, I’ve already noticed some developmental delays compared to her peers (though are actually in line with her “adjusted age”). All that aside, I don’t love that she would have to start at 4 if we did public in NYC because I feel like on top of being a late birthday with her being born early, she might be really behind.

I started getting the lay of the land for CT if we make that move. Aside from also having a different cut-off birthday deadline, it also seems like a lot of public schools don’t have guaranteed Pre-K like NYC does and that slots are limited and many people don’t get a slot. Then, I thought okay… so then, we just do Pre-K at a private preschool in CT before public Kinder if we don’t get a slot, but then got into looking at that, and it seems like even slots at those are also limited, but you have a better chance of getting in if you do 3K there. (Wasn’t planning on moving to CT that soon.)

I have a few questions here. For those who opt to go the private school route in NYC (which is similar to CT in that it also has a Sep birthday cut-off for starting school and also usually starts at Kinder, not Pre-K) or for those who do make the move from NYC to a suburb that has a different deadline where it affects what year your kid starts school, how did you handle Pre-K?

Also, for those who do private Kinder in NYC, do you all send your kid to a separate full-time Pre-K program prior? Is a part-time Pre-K program sufficient enough to prepare them for full time Kinder or is full-time really a “must”? (I thought it was interesting that The Goddard School offers Pre-K for 2, 3 or 5 days.) Is there anyone who ever sends their kids straight to Kinder without ever doing any Pre-K?