I never understood the difference between public and private until today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

My kid's public elementary school has a science lab, gym, two art rooms, a band room, and a general music room. Most schools around here have all of those things. (Maybe only one art room and one music room, depending on the size of the school)
But it's true that the library doesn't have a fireplace. It does have a lovely big window out to the courtyard, though, so it's not too bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its not so much the schools (ie, the building), but the teachers, parents and students. I had DS at a MD public elementary school for two years, which felt like a lifetime.

How is their special education program?

For the special ed kids, it looked great. For my ADHD kid, having the special ed kids was one more unneeded distraction. (There were 4 autistic kids in his small 32 person classroom.)

Really? How entitled of you.
I’ll bet that your kid was the distraction to everyone !

He was! So we adjusted his meds so he wouldn’t impede the education of the children of other taxpayers.

But entitled? Well, I pay over $70k per year in Maryland taxes, so I should be able to send junior to a decent public school where his education — and not half-assed social engineering — is the top priority.

It's a common misconception -- particularly among people who pay a lot in taxes, apparently -- that taxes are user fees. But they're not.

Also, what you call social engineering, I call the expectation that ALL children, including children with disabilities, have an equal right to a decent public school where their education is the top priority.

Government is a service we buy, like trash removal or dishwasher repair, to do things we cannot do ourselves, generally to resolve collective action problems. (No one would individually build a road or design an aircraft carrier.) As such, taxes are indeed user fees -- money we pay for these services. Every few years we get the chance to change the service provider (I've switched my Internet, cell phone and lawn care company less frequently) through elections. If I am paying a $70k user fee for state-provided services, I expect them to be good.

Public education is one such collective action problem -- I have no intention of opening a little red schoolhouse or home-schooling my children. And I fully support using my user fees to pay to educate children with disabilities. However, I do not support structuring the educational environment in such a way that the education of one group materially and negatively impacts the education of another group. In the case of junior's time in the MD public school system, putting four special needs kids in with 28 other children was a significant distraction to the one already-frazzled 4th grade teacher, who then off-loaded part of the responsibility to care for them to the other non-special needs children, including junior.

Yes, this was our experience also. The teachers are not happy with the situation either. They are stressed and overworked and frankly told us they thought it was a wonderful opportunity for our child. I bet we were at the same elementary school. And yes, my child has ADHD too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a public school in NY that pretty much had all these things. When schools are town-based, in wealthy areas, and funded by local property taxes, the local community can do this. The small number of disadvantaged kids in the zone get the benefits, too.

None of the VA “good” districts are all that because of the county funding models.

I agree!

Went to a public school in NJ that was also town-based. So much different and more efficient than the ridiculously large county based MCPS system.

+1000
Public schools run by towns or cities are better at teaching (curriculum, spending, community, fewer disparate interests) than large counties like La, MOCo, etc. Central office is just in a social justice power trip at most of these large county places. And would never cut it at a private school or charter school where one is held accountable.

Exactly!

[Anonymous]

Ok, my experience might not be quite the same as yours, but I teach at a public school with very, very nice facilities. Everyone is blown away when they first see it. After awhile you get used to it and eventually it becomes meh. Sure pretty facilities are nice, but I'm not sure if it's something the kids really appreciate in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

My kid's public elementary school has a science lab, gym, two art rooms, a band room, and a general music room. Most schools around here have all of those things. (Maybe only one art room and one music room, depending on the size of the school)
But it's true that the library doesn't have a fireplace. It does have a lovely big window out to the courtyard, though, so it's not too bad.

PP here. That’s why other PP’s comment is so odd...these things are par for the course at most schools. Why does she think they’re unnecessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

I was educated in a much poorer country and then came to the US and kicked ass at Harvard. you can't buy knowledge and even if you could facilities are the last thing that needs investment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a public school in NY that pretty much had all these things. When schools are town-based, in wealthy areas, and funded by local property taxes, the local community can do this. The small number of disadvantaged kids in the zone get the benefits, too.

None of the VA “good” districts are all that because of the county funding models.

I agree!

Went to a public school in NJ that was also town-based. So much different and more efficient than the ridiculously large county based MCPS system.

+1000
Public schools run by towns or cities are better at teaching (curriculum, spending, community, fewer disparate interests) than large counties like La, MOCo, etc. Central office is just in a social justice power trip at most of these large county places. And would never cut it at a private school or charter school where one is held accountable.

Exactly!

Mostly when they are wealthy towns that have no issues with immigrants or poverty,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

I was educated in a much poorer country and then came to the US and kicked ass at Harvard. you can't buy knowledge and even if you could facilities are the last thing that needs investment.

Huh. And to think there were other students at Harvard that considered learning to be fun, and interesting. We get one life. I’ll take the path of joy and enlightenment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

I was educated in a much poorer country and then came to the US and kicked ass at Harvard. you can't buy knowledge and even if you could facilities are the last thing that needs investment.

And yet you don’t feel that education is something that should interest the student?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

I was educated in a much poorer country and then came to the US and kicked ass at Harvard. you can't buy knowledge and even if you could facilities are the last thing that needs investment.

Huh. And to think there were other students at Harvard that considered learning to be fun, and interesting. We get one life. I’ll take the path of joy and enlightenment.

and yet i know so much more than you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What left you awestruck?

The facility for starters.
I just toured the lower campus for preschool through 8th. It had 2 gymnasiums, a pool, amazing art and music studios. All children take up an instrument. The science lab space is amazing, and they are expanding to a new innovative stem center. There is crazy fabrication shop. All kids take Spanish and Mandarin. The library has fireplaces.
It was magical
I toured Hogwarts.

this is precisely why i didn't want my kids in the private school. it's a school, not a resort. they don't need any of those facilities.

Fireplaces in the library, sure, that’s unnecessary. But you think they don’t need a science lab, gym, or spaces to learn art and music?

OP specifically referred to the difference between public and private.
a gym - sure. two gyms are not necessary. not all children should be taking up instruments (long story but as someone who played an instrument semi-seriously this is BS)
you don't need "new innovative stem center". American science education is way too much hands on. If you want to be better in physics you need more math, no more labs
etc etc
I prefer school to have a bit of an ascetic vibe. school is not a place where "fun" should be the primary objective

If you prefer that, great. I think most parents want their kids to get a well-rounded education in a way that sparks their interest. And I disagree with your characterization that if education is made interesting, that “fun is the primary objective”.

if education is any good it won't be all that fun or interesting. Americans don't understand that which is why their edu is so atrocious for the money spent.

I truly feel sorry for you if you think that education or the acquisition of knowledge should not be interesting to the pupil. What country were you educated in?

I was educated in a much poorer country and then came to the US and kicked ass at Harvard. you can't buy knowledge and even if you could facilities are the last thing that needs investment.

And yet you don’t feel that education is something that should interest the student?

it's complicated. interest is something that is acquired not something that comes naturally. when you delve into a topic it will most likely interest you. but american style cutesy textbooks and hands on games that are supposed to spark interest are distractions that make it harder to dig deeper and develop actual interest.

also, most people/children are not smart enough to be truly interested in academic subjects. this is not a slight against them - most academic subjects are esoteric, abstract and way too complex for most people. america's system is way too focused on average and below average performers who will never really master academic knowledge. meanwhile the brightest students are sufficiently challenged especially in math. and yet the solution is always more money, more computer, more facilities, more crap.