Private Schools are bad for everyone. Agree or disagree?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. Options in the country are what makes things so innovative. I'm glad there are all types of schools out there and everyone isn't a cookie cutter replica of each other. I hate the elitism of some privates, but in a way are glad I don't have to deal with a lot of elitist families. In a way I think the segregation goes both ways.

+1

I believe in school choices and options. For instance, I like performing arts or magnet schools which caters towards a student's needs. We're not all the same and the needs of students vary. If we didn't have choices, then I think some students would fall through the cracks. Honestly, there aren't enough school choices for families out there. I really like the Friends School in Baltimore http://www.friendsbalt.org and I wish DC had a similar type of school. I'm having the most difficult time finding a school both private and public that I like in the DC area.

[Anonymous]

Disagree, of course.

Many private school have completely different teaching philosophies (think Montessori - my child went to one), some teach to special needs children,
to gifted children,
to learning disabled AND gifted children,
to foreign children who are there temporarily because of their parents' work (my child went to one like that too),
etc....

Some are elitist. Not all.

OP if you are not aware of the immense diversity of schools, public and private, then you are ridiculously immature and ignorant.

[Anonymous]

PP here.

My oldest now goes to his local public, my youngest to Montessori. When we lived in Europe, we enrolled DC1 in a British private which catered primarily to transient international students, many of whom stayed less than one school year, as we did. Incredibly, it was a nurturing yet academically excellent place. I also looked at schools for gifted and learning disabled students and schools for the gifted.

I come from a rather elitist school... while adjustment to "real life" was interesting for me, to say the least, I now know through my children's experiences that this is not the sum total of private schools.

[Anonymous]

I disagree with the whole premise of who's bad and why. I wholeheartedly agree that the public education system is an extremely vital national asset and that it should be supported. But I also think that our public education system is fundamentally broken and needs serious overhaul. The public education system has in many places become watered down and broken, to serve in many cases as little more than a glorified daycare. We are churning out class after class of kids with minimal literacy, numeracy, minimal understanding of science, geography, current events, civics, et cetera. Schools have been placing lower and lower expectations on students, in terms of schoolwork, rigor, organizational skills and discipline. Universities are horrified at how underprepared students are - even as they water down their own curricula - for example, the battle raging in the engineering community about whether to require a Masters degree for licensure due to the erosion of university engineering programs. And for those students who aren't destined for academia, there are far too few opportunities for vocational or other types of education. The educational system seems to have little clue of what preparation kids need for entering the workforce or even general life skills needed which could even help them with routine things like adequate math for managing their household budget and financial planning. Many public schools are at this point little more than a glorified daycare with watered-down educational content. A lot of what's happening with regard to families abandoning public schools has to do with a fundamental lack of faith in the traditional public school system - and that's not just reflected in private school enrollment, it's also in wildfire charter school enrollment along with, surprisingly, a huge increase in homeschooling - a huge component of that is a vote of no-confidence in local schools. Berating parents and calling them "bad" is not the answer - fixing the school system and winning families back is the answer.

[Anonymous]

How I chose to educate my children is 100% my business and 0% everyone else's.

[Anonymous]

PP at 9:05, the data do not support what you're saying.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2013456

[Anonymous]

NP - Interesting study, 10:16. But is it actually measuring by the exact same standard across all years going back to 1973? Somehow I doubt it is.

Seems to me there a.) has not been any agreed-upon common educational standard or metrics, whether nationally or even within jurisdictions, b.) let alone any agreed-upon educational standard that's been in place going back to the 1970s.

After all, even today there is still a lot of disagreement within the educational community on so many things relating to standards, like CAS and Common Core, and that's 40 years after the cited study begins. If we still don't have agreement on standards today, how is one to presume we had consensus and agreement then, or for that matter buy-in on longitudinal testing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP - Interesting study, 10:16. But is it actually measuring by the exact same standard across all years going back to 1973? Somehow I doubt it is.

Luckily, you don't have to speculate about the answer for this question. You can look it up:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/ltt_main_diff.aspx

[Anonymous]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2012/03/26/7-signs-that-americas-educational-decline-is-jeopardizing-its-national-security/

[Anonymous]

Bad for poor kids great for rich kids. Take two kids growing up in DC, one poor and going to public school and the other rich and going to an elite private. These kids have nowhere near the same opportunities. I kind of wish they would get rid of privates altogether, and I went to a catholic school growing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bad for poor kids great for rich kids. Take two kids growing up in DC, one poor and going to public school and the other rich and going to an elite private. These kids have nowhere near the same opportunities. I kind of wish they would get rid of privates altogether, and I went to a catholic school growing up.

Poor kid, give an example. I agree with you somewhat regarding the extracurriculars (exotic vacations, tutoring, internships/networking for summer jobs) that more affluent families have access to in supporting their kids' navigation through a private school education, and also the extra nudge that some teachers may provide wealthier clientele. I think lower middle income kids can benefit from educational opportunities at private schools as long as they come in with confidence and a clear understanding that they need to focus and not become bedazzled by their rich peers who enjoy bragging about their more lavish and "easier" lifestyles. Parents of lower income kid have to work harder at finding enrichment opportunities and programs outside of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bad for poor kids great for rich kids. Take two kids growing up in DC, one poor and going to public school and the other rich and going to an elite private. These kids have nowhere near the same opportunities. I kind of wish they would get rid of privates altogether, and I went to a catholic school growing up.

There are 5 private Catholic schools in the area that are completely free, feed to the area private HS's and many kids have a mentor until their 2nd year of college. This is bad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP - Interesting study, 10:16. But is it actually measuring by the exact same standard across all years going back to 1973? Somehow I doubt it is.

Luckily, you don't have to speculate about the answer for this question. You can look it up:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/ltt_main_diff.aspx

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they delegate that testing to the states (i.e. CAS) - and the states in turn define their own standards, state by state, and year by year?

Not exactly a "common yardstick". Anything but.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with the whole premise of who's bad and why. I wholeheartedly agree that the public education system is an extremely vital national asset and that it should be supported. But I also think that our public education system is fundamentally broken and needs serious overhaul. The public education system has in many places become watered down and broken, to serve in many cases as little more than a glorified daycare. We are churning out class after class of kids with minimal literacy, numeracy, minimal understanding of science, geography, current events, civics, et cetera. Schools have been placing lower and lower expectations on students, in terms of schoolwork, rigor, organizational skills and discipline. Universities are horrified at how underprepared students are - even as they water down their own curricula - for example, the battle raging in the engineering community about whether to require a Masters degree for licensure due to the erosion of university engineering programs. And for those students who aren't destined for academia, there are far too few opportunities for vocational or other types of education. The educational system seems to have little clue of what preparation kids need for entering the workforce or even general life skills needed which could even help them with routine things like adequate math for managing their household budget and financial planning. Many public schools are at this point little more than a glorified daycare with watered-down educational content. A lot of what's happening with regard to families abandoning public schools has to do with a fundamental lack of faith in the traditional public school system - and that's not just reflected in private school enrollment, it's also in wildfire charter school enrollment along with, surprisingly, a huge increase in homeschooling - a huge component of that is a vote of no-confidence in local schools. Berating parents and calling them "bad" is not the answer - fixing the school system and winning families back is the answer.

+1

Totally agree!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad for poor kids great for rich kids. Take two kids growing up in DC, one poor and going to public school and the other rich and going to an elite private. These kids have nowhere near the same opportunities. I kind of wish they would get rid of privates altogether, and I went to a catholic school growing up.

Poor kid, give an example. I agree with you somewhat regarding the extracurriculars (exotic vacations, tutoring, internships/networking for summer jobs) that more affluent families have access to in supporting their kids' navigation through a private school education, and also the extra nudge that some teachers may provide wealthier clientele. I think lower middle income kids can benefit from educational opportunities at private schools as long as they come in with confidence and a clear understanding that they need to focus and not become bedazzled by their rich peers who enjoy bragging about their more lavish and "easier" lifestyles. Parents of lower income kid have to work harder at finding enrichment opportunities and programs outside of the school.

The poor kid can't afford to go to private school so gets a terrible education at a failing DC school while the rich kid goes to a school costing $30,000 a year that gives him opportunities the poor kid couldn't dream of. I don't believe in socialism or anything but I think it's sad that there is such a disparity in opportunity and poor people are almost destined for failure because of bad schools. Sadly there isn't much push to fix them because the wealthy send their kids elsewhere or move to the suburbs. I think politicians should have to send their kids to the local public school and see if that would change things.