HBS v DAO twin dilemma

[twindilemma82]

I am really struggling with secondary school choices for my twins.

Twin 1 is super academic, very quiet, lacks confidence but very driven. She hasn't had a good time in primary and really struggled to make friends. She was successful in the grammar school exams. She is desperate to go to HBS and I think it would suit her as she'd do well in a small academic environment without boys and where the girls are studious and unpretentious.

However currently we've listed DAO as first on both twins' CAF because of the sibling policy and because of the wide ranging extra curricular activities. Twin 1 is so desperate to go to HBS, she talks of nothing else. She's become miserable about her future and generally anxious. She's written me long word documents on the subject of HBS. She doesn't understand why she worked so hard for the exam if she doesn't get to go to the school she wants. She did work extremely hard.

Her sister is less academic (she chose not to sit the eleven plus). She is very sociable and extremely kind. She is still academic and will do well if pushed. Her self esteem has been knocked by her sister's progress. She never does better than her sister in tests and is always comparing herself (even though I try to avoid this). She wants to go to DAO because of the extra curricular activities and its music offer. She does see the benefits of not being with her sister (and so going to a different school) but prefers to go to the better school.

If I switch the application preferences, twin 1 is likely to get into HBS. It's possible that twin 2 will get into another school that we like but it's also possible that she won't. The other school that we like is fine with great facilities but it doesn't compare to DAO in terms of results or extra curricular offer. If she doesn't get that school, then we are very much stuck!

It feels like there's no right answer and no matter what we do, we are letting one twin down. Any advice ?

This seems like enough of a diversion from the OP's issue to start a different thread if you'd like to compare the two schools in broader terms.

OP's issue really isn't about which school is better in some absolute terms (a measure that arguably doesn't exist), it's about individual preference for a specific student. They're both strong schools, but as you acknowledged they're completely different - HBS is half the size, all girls, and fully selective so the academic range is different. Some students will just prefer that setting over DAO in the same way I prefer camping to cruises. OP's DD1 believes that she'll do better and be happier in HBS's environment and OP think's she's probably right that that environment will be a good fit.

Yes, it only takes sacrificing Twin2 to a random school, that's all.

I won't separate these issues; they're inherently mixed. It's the parents who provide tutoring opportunities or sign their children up for the 11+ exams, and it's primarily the parents' preferences reflected on the CAF form, which may or may not consider the children's preferences at age 10. In most cases, it relies on the parents to decide what matters most, rather than what the children think is best. If it were for university applications, that might be a different story.

It's difficult because if you send them both to DAO and twin 1 is unhappy, or has less friends than twin 2 she will be angry and feel resentful (even if she'd have been as unhappy at HBS). If twin 1 goes to HBS and twin 2 loses the spot at DAO twin 2 will resent her sister. Key is probably understanding that if twin 2 accepts the place would she lose it if twin 1 then took a waiting list place at HBS? If not that seems best solution.

No. Twin 2 is absolutely not being "sacrificed" in any way shape or form by allowing Twin 1 to submit her preferences based on her rather than her sister.

Here's how you can tell... if you removed the sibling link between the girls then twin A would be able to go to HBS if she chose that over DAO, and OP would likely have no problem doing that. Twin A is not only getting zero benefit from the sibling link, she's actually having her first choice option taken away from her by it right now. But twin B would likely never have had an option to attend DAO without being able to get a sibling place based on her sister's 11+ score, so attending "random school" as you say is where she would be without the sibling link.

As it stands now twin B is gaining access to her preferred option at the expense of twin A not being allowed to pursue her own preferred option. Allowing twin A to choose the school she wants for herself is just putting them back on equal footing where each daughter is allowed to choose the school they want from the options available to them based on their own performance and abilities.

Yes, I understand your reasoning, I just don't share this "equal footing" view. And Twin2 is not "allowed to choose the school they want from the options available to them" - she will be allocated a place by the council. OP says it's not a problem as other local schools are good too, just not as good as DAO.

Just read the original post:

"It's possible that twin 2 will get into another school that we like but it's also possible that she won't. The other school that we like is fine with great facilities but it doesn't compare to DAO in terms of results or extra curricular offer. If she doesn't get that school, then we are very much stuck!"

So they are risking Twin2's options in general.

And Twin2 is not "allowed to choose the school they want from the options available to them" - she will be allocated a place by the council.

Places are allocated based on the student's submitted preferences. Students get their first choice of the schools they qualify for a place at. Without the sibling link that is likely to be HBS for twin A and "Random school" for twin B because twin B chose not to attempt the 11+ to earn a place for DAO on her own as her sister did.

Using the sibling place path to give twin B an option she wouldn't otherwise have achieved for herself would be great if it wasn't at the expense of twin A. But it is.

Presumably it wouldn't be a 'random choice allocated by the council' for twin 2, but whatever her highest preference that she could get a place at? Aka whatever was listed as 2/3/4 after DAO

This applies to any school sibling admission policy. Why should it exist for some schools? Generally, it benefits the family as a whole, you can't just break that up as separate problem.

Yep. If the sibling place at DAO is revoked when twin A accepts a wait list place at HBS then twin B would end up at the first choice school she could get a place at without having a sibling in the selection process. That's why I put "random school" in quotes - it's silly hyperbole.

Yes, but OP is not sure which school Twin2 will get in the end - "the other school we like" or "we're stuck" school.

@perplex I have zero clue what you're trying to say in your last comment about sibling policies.

Sibling policies can be a benefit to families - having siblings at the same school can ease logistics and it can boost one or more siblings as a happy side effect. It's often a no-lose scenario where using the sibling option only adds benefits for some or all family members.

But that's not the case for OP's family. She's acknowledged that both girls would probably benefit from being at separate schools and twin A is being harmed if they take advantage of the sibling policy at DAO. This is a long way from a no-lose scenario.

She's acknowledged that both girls would probably benefit from being at separate schools and twin A is being harmed if they take advantage of the sibling policy at DAO. This is a long way from a no-lose scenario.

No, OPs opinion is a mixed one, I can't see twin A is being harmed. Twin B prefer better school but also think seperate school is a good thing.

I can't see twin A is being harmed

If you an't see the harm in actively denying twin A the chance to go to the highly academic school she earned herself a place at and desperately wants to go to where both she and her mum think she'll do better socially because it's more important that her sister get an unearned spot at her first choice school then there's no reason to continue this conversation. That's a bonkers statement.

They are individuals and should have been treated as such . So they both get to put down the option that they want and that they qualify to apply for .

The opportunity to attend a more selective school, doesn't necessarily mean a child will develop better academically. The intense desire to get into these schools may be driven more by perceived "earn the place" rather than rational evaluation. It's the parents' responsibility to clarify what matters most in terms of selectivity and academic development.

Every year, some parents have the option to choose between these types of schools and opt for the less selective one for various reasons. For instance, one parent on the 11+ forum choose less selective schools when given choice between the exact two, looking back I don't believe they are harming their children by doing so.

Taking away opportunity and choice is a harm of its own.

DD1 has chosen to work for a chance to go to HBS and achieved that. She desperately wants to pursue that opportunity she's earned for herself and OP as a parent believes that that is the best school choice for twin A becaue the size and environment are a better fit for her than DAO. Taking that opportunity away from her is harm, and it's incredibly unfair to do so in order to give her sibling the opportunity to their preferred school instead.

And by your own logic there is absolutely no way to know that DD2 won't do better at her second choice school than DAO, so there's zero harm in DD2 potentially losing the sibling place at DAO.

Taking away choice or opportunity not always results in harm.

Yes, my argument is that parents shouldn't overthink about selectivity as an academic development factor when comparing these two schools; there isn't much difference in that regard. Additionally, twin A also participated (chose) in the DAO test to secure a place. However, there are many other differences that should be the main consideration, and certain aspects of the child's belief may not matter much.

Has the parent consider, beyond selective and academic, how other possible outcome of school compared to DAO?

On one hand, you're using the parents' and twin A's beliefs to argue for twin A, but on the other hand, you're using my logic for twin B without considering the parents' and twin B's will?

Perhaps go read again. OP has made it very clear that neither she nor DD1 are just looking at academic selectivity - they both like the small size and single-sex environment for DD1.

Your last paragraph is incomprensible, but I only used your logic to point out its flaws. Not being able to predict the future to know for sure how each daughter will fair at each school is an absolutely pointless argument because that's true for every school for both children and OP hasn't made any statements at all to suggest she believes one path is a guarantee of success.

Read from above all I suggest that the OP consider realistically how much harm not being in the smaller, single-sex school might cause twin A(while also acknowledging that this might mean fewer provisions in some areas in terms of suitability). And think the same for twin B. The academic selectivity factor between these two schools should be the least to be concerned.

It's important to weigh these factors against other uncertain outcomes. And the sibling policy offers a unique option for decision making that other family with individual child can't have.

Twin 1 learns the hard way that doing an extra effort is not worth anything if she is denied the desired school for which she has qualified at 11+ exams only to secure twin 2 who has made no effort for the desired school place.

personally maintaining and improving psychological health for twin 1 would be my primary concern. if she is currently fragile and wants the smaller school I would aim in that direction.
but maybe the reality is neither school is the right fit.

to me it sounds like twin 1 pushes herself not out of the joy of accomplishment but due to friendship issues and the fear of perceived failure.
so my vote would be two different schools due to two different personality types or a totally different option.

I suggest that the OP consider realistically how much harm not being in the smaller, single-sex school might cause twin A

I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Allowing twin A to work so hard to get into her dream school and then telling her she can't go and instead has to go to a school she doesn't want to attend because she has to help her sister get into her first choice school (after the sister chose not to even sit the 11+) is far more likely to cause serious, long-lasting harm to DD1 and the family relationships that outweighs any objective comparisons about school quality. And a student who is deeply angry and unhappy about being sent to a school will almost never do as well there as they could at an equal school where they're happy to be. The harm at stake isn't sending a child to DAO rather than HBS. Refusing to let DD1 take up the place she earned at a school OP agrees will be a better fit for her tells her that the work she put in was pointless and that she's expected to sacrifice her dream for her sister. DD1 would be right to not forgive that.

Please send each child to the school that best suits them.

I never understood why I had to do somethings because my brother wanted to do it. I'm rapidly heading towards 60 and it still rankles.