On 2006-03-10 20:19:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-03-09 17:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
"This week I had a conversation with a parent who heard about Hyde and wanted some feedback about it. The parent had heard very mixed things about Hyde, mostly negative. I shared our family's experience and encouraged the parent to look for alternatives to Hyde. Based on the parent's description of the child's needs and mental health issues, I think Hyde would be a disaster. The parent said that my feedback was consistent with what she had heard from a number other people. She's now looking for other schools to pursue (with the advice of an educational consultant).
During the conversation the parent said that Hyde now expects parents to make a two-year commitment. Is that true? If so, when did that start? If it's true, I guess Hyde says it is doing this because it doesn't think it can have an impact in just one year. Or, is this merely Hyde's thinly disguised ploy to lock in 2 years' worth of tuition and fees and a way to combat the high attrition rate?"
I was at hyde 30 years ago. Hyde was not perfect. I was there when Tommy was there. I can understand why Tommy feels the way he does. Henry could be a real prick. Having Joe get in your face and scream at you was not theraputic to any degree IMHO. I saw a number of kids fail. Hyde worked for me. I found an inner strength and an ablity to persever in my experiences there. I find the rants about how the place completely sucks, fatuious and closed minded. I am sorry if some of the posts I made on this board aid in what seem to be an effort to make trash about hyde google-able. I know that there is at least one person with whom I went to hyde with that reads this board. I want you to know that I respect your dedication to your belief in Hyde. I offer my appologies if what I have posted here has offended you.
Hyde had and still has a profound positive effect on my life.
Sid"
I'm always pleased to hear when students appreciate their experience at a school and can see how it affected their lives. I'm happy for you, Sid.
But . . . please understand that many of us had horrible experiences at Hyde. In a school with such a diverse student body, it's inevitable that some people are going to have a good experience. At Hyde, however, there's clear, substantial, and compelling evidence that many students and their parents have terrible experiences. A lot depends on when you were there, who happened to be on staff then, what kinds of students Hyde accepted then, etc. The many comments from people on this board show over and over again that many of us were deeply scarred by the mistreatment and emotional chaos at Hyde. I'm a more recent Hyde veteran; your experience was 30 years ago. My impression is that the school is very different now. Probably because of competition in the boarding school marketplace, Hyde now accepts lots of students with major psychiatric and drug/alcohol problems. The evidence is overwhelming that Hyde isn't equipped to deal with or help many of these students. Hyde's model just doesn't work for many of these students, despite all of the Gauld (etc.) rhetoric and slick marketing that says that "character education" works for nearly everyone. Hyde is trying to survive as a school by reinventing itself. There's no question about that. It's trying to fit a square peg (Joe Gauld's "character education" mission) into a round hole (the many students Hyde accepts who need something very different from what Hyde offers). It may work for some, but it definitely doesn't work for many others. I think that's why Hyde's attrition rate is so unusually high and why so many people leave in disgust. You don't need to be a genius to figure this out. The underground at Hyde says that administrators are very, very worried about enrollments and competition, and the school's controversial and ambiguous identity and reputation. Hyde knows it's in trouble and is working hard to market itself to the masses.
At the very least Hyde should narrow its focus and limit itself to the very small number of students who are appropriate for the Hyde model. That probably means shrinking to a mere fraction of its current size. Sadly, to feed itself Hyde has chosen to accept so many students who don't belong there. That's part of the Hyde tragedy. The other part is Hyde staff's arrogant assumption that it can turn around everyone who walks through the door (and if you resist or question Hyde there will likely be some staff person who belittles you, shames you, and tries to convince you that the apple didn't fall far from the tree, blah, blah, blah). Hyde would do well to practice what it preaches and examine the truth about itself, even if that leads to some disharmony.
