The case for "low rigor" at highly competitive private lower schools?

[Anonymous]

OP, I am surprised to read some of the responses. I had heard that most of the top area private schools in our area are less rigorous in the early years, and that bears out in our experience too. My kids attend a highly-regarded private school, and our neighborhood kids in public school sound like they are doing a lot more homework than mine are. My neighbors gripe that a bunch of it is "busy" work, but their kids are definitely having to sit down for longer periods of time to do it.

The difference in rigor is something my parent friends in our school are aware of, and we discuss it. Echoing some of the other comments here, we like the attention our kids are getting in the specials and in helping them develop socially. We like that the school emphasizes a love of learning, and that there is a wide range of abilities in each class. We also really like the community. My friends and I are trusting the school to "ramp up" the kids' study skills, etc so they will eventually be ready for our rigorous upper school. Each year we evaluate things and are content with our choice.

Yes, there are definitely times I wish that my kids were challenged a bit more, and there are times I feel uneasy that when it's time to "ramp up" - my kids won't be ready. The bottom line, however, is that I'm trusting the school to give my kids what they need when they need it. I'm trusting myself to figure out when there are gaps and to escalate things to my kids' teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with your premise but you highlight a different mindset that might be at work.

Fundamentally, the reason we make the investment in a very expensive private school is that we believe in a more progressive approach to education. In the early years, the goal is to develop the child's social and emotional skills as much as the academics. We want our child to manage themselves emotionally, navigate all sorts of social situations, and develop influence and leadership skills. We don't just value art and drama for presentation skills, but to explore artistic sensibilities or interest and appreciation of the arts. We believe that joy in learning isn't internalized with carrots and stick or rote skill acquisition, but by actually making learning fun and appropriate for the child's actual intellectual development.

The "academic rigor" in elementary school used in the public G&T and AAP aren't very meaningful to us. We had every confidence that our child would be on the front of any achievement curve because she has every possible advantage in the world. So our focus was on meaning and concepts, not mechanics. My child was reading at 4, but is only just not learning how to read literature closely in middle school. She learned her multiplication tables "organically" with manipulatives and games in 2nd grade so she never thought of math as "boring." But it will be a few years before she gets to the post-calculus math that will determine how far she can go in the sciences. Our worry is that too much attention to hitting arbitrary milestones can be harmful for long-term success because it ignores figuring out when she would be most developmentally ready to go fast and when to go slow. Now that she's going to high school, I feel pretty confident that her academic skills are second to none but the oddball prodigy.

A more blunt way of saying it is that we want our child to be a "boss" not a "grind." We wanted a school to cultivate our child as someone who asks the questions that other need to answer and has the skills to get other people to see things differently. And it doesn't matter to us whether she chooses to be an artist or an entertainer rather than an academic or lawyer or doctor as long as she uses her talents at the highest level possible.

I would love to know how this works out for you in the end. Your pomposity amazes me.

[Anonymous]

I think this discussion would benefit from a common agreement on terminology. "Academic rigor" is a vague term that can mean different things to different people. Some people might view it as whether children are pushed to learn as much as possible. Others may view it as whether children have lots of homework. Others think about it as high scores on tests. There can be other variations too. Some of those definitions might overlap, but not others.

[Anonymous]

OP, There are some really good and thoughtful comments here. Your neighbors have a point. I do not think that either of my DS's had good math instruction, in particular, in their private elementary schools (we tried two). Now in a rigorous private HS they are doing fine but their work ethic is not the same as some of the kids that transferred in from more traditional environments or public schools. They do "love to learn" but they don't like to do their homework.

This might be because they are teenage boys but your neighbor's observations do seem true for us. There were many other benefits though from their early private education, and the emphasis on social development definitely benefited my kids. My 10th grade DS also writes better than I did as a senior in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A more blunt way of saying it is that we want our child to be a "boss" not a "grind." We wanted a school to cultivate our child as someone who asks the questions that other need to answer and has the skills to get other people to see things differently. And it doesn't matter to us whether she chooses to be an artist or an entertainer rather than an academic or lawyer or doctor as long as she uses her talents at the highest level possible.

Snort.

[Anonymous]

OP - I have to disagree with your statements from my own experience. The kids entering my kids' private school in 9th grade from public school are more often than not at a disadvantage in some areas. They may be right on level for math and science, but almost uniformly are very behind in their writing and analytical skills. In addition, they are at a complete loss as to how to make a presentation, which inevitably requires these skills and is required on practically a weekly basis in my kids' school. These are skills which take more time to learn and are harder to develop and which simply does not happen at an early age in public schools.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get from your post, especially since you're committed to sending your to private next year. Do you need advice on what to say as a comeback to people who question your choices? You need to know that people will always question your decisions, but you don't need to listen to them. We should all do what is best for our own families and not worry about what others will think…it's gets you and your kids no where.

[Anonymous]

PP, that is absolutely not true about kids coming from advanced academic programs in NoVA and MoCo. Many if these kids score 97-100% on their SSATs to get into private schools and have very well rounded experience in language arts, PowerPoint, making presentations. Yes there are probably some kids accepted from less rigorous public schools but those aren't the whole picture. And those kids catch up fast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP - I have to disagree with your statements from my own experience. The kids entering my kids' private school in 9th grade from public school are more often than not at a disadvantage in some areas. They may be right on level for math and science, but almost uniformly are very behind in their writing and analytical skills. In addition, they are at a complete loss as to how to make a presentation, which inevitably requires these skills and is required on practically a weekly basis in my kids' school. These are skills which take more time to learn and are harder to develop and which simply does not happen at an early age in public schools.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get from your post, especially since you're committed to sending your to private next year. Do you need advice on what to say as a comeback to people who question your choices? You need to know that people will always question your decisions, but you don't need to listen to them. We should all do what is best for our own families and not worry about what others will think…it's gets you and your kids no where.

And yet my two children in public school started routinely making presentations in first grade.

[Anonymous]

The "rigor" in public schools is due to testing. So yes, in that sense, they really push the memorizing facts to pass a test aspect.

Private school was more focused on teaching facts but also teaching processes, building skills, etc.

Private schools have the luxury of building classes of students that are already above grade level and have the capacity to learn facts and information quickly without as much repetition. This means they don't need to stress so much like a public school to make sure kids are not falling behind, not learning. They already know the kids are ahead so they private school can focus on other areas besides just getting kids to learn basic facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I have to disagree with your statements from my own experience. The kids entering my kids' private school in 9th grade from public school are more often than not at a disadvantage in some areas. They may be right on level for math and science, but almost uniformly are very behind in their writing and analytical skills. In addition, they are at a complete loss as to how to make a presentation, which inevitably requires these skills and is required on practically a weekly basis in my kids' school. These are skills which take more time to learn and are harder to develop and which simply does not happen at an early age in public schools.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get from your post, especially since you're committed to sending your to private next year. Do you need advice on what to say as a comeback to people who question your choices? You need to know that people will always question your decisions, but you don't need to listen to them. We should all do what is best for our own families and not worry about what others will think…it's gets you and your kids no where.

And yet my two children in public school started routinely making presentations in first grade.

I'm surprised at that one as well. My public school kid does way more presenting than my private school kid. Private school kid does more long papers, public school kid does way more overall writing though (some of that is a function of class choices -public school kid takes many humanities AP classes which have a heavy writing component).

[Anonymous]

PP you are also incorrect - in the advanced academic programs in NoVA and MoCo, the standardized tests are an afterthought. It's pretty easy for those kids to learn enough to pass the tests in about one week of class time (really - that's about the max amount of time they spend on test materials). The math is more advanced than the norm in private school around here (except for just a few kids and Holton has started an advanced math track for lower school ... to be the same as the public school track). The English, History, and Science classes are very detailed and include writing papers and making presentations. What is missing is a lot of hand-holding, free-flowing class discussion time (kids have to learn to speak clearly and quickly), etc. We have one in public and one in private, so can see this stuff clearly. There are many other threads on this with consensus from more than just my opinion ... enriched public (AAP or advanced programs) are stronger IF your child is a self-starter, not intimidated by 25-30 other kids in a class, a 22-minute lunch period, lots of work, having to make your own way a lot of the time. And that is true through high school (e.g., Blair, TJ, etc.) If your child responds better to smaller classes, would rather have more time to do art than math/science, tends to sit in the back and doodle if not called on regularly in class, then private school is the way to go. But it's not more rigorous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP you are also incorrect - in the advanced academic programs in NoVA and MoCo, the standardized tests are an afterthought. It's pretty easy for those kids to learn enough to pass the tests in about one week of class time (really - that's about the max amount of time they spend on test materials). The math is more advanced than the norm in private school around here (except for just a few kids and Holton has started an advanced math track for lower school ... to be the same as the public school track). The English, History, and Science classes are very detailed and include writing papers and making presentations. What is missing is a lot of hand-holding, free-flowing class discussion time (kids have to learn to speak clearly and quickly), etc. We have one in public and one in private, so can see this stuff clearly. There are many other threads on this with consensus from more than just my opinion ... enriched public (AAP or advanced programs) are stronger IF your child is a self-starter, not intimidated by 25-30 other kids in a class, a 22-minute lunch period, lots of work, having to make your own way a lot of the time. And that is true through high school (e.g., Blair, TJ, etc.) If your child responds better to smaller classes, would rather have more time to do art than math/science, tends to sit in the back and doodle if not called on regularly in class, then private school is the way to go. But it's not more rigorous.

I'm so sorry your private school child is such a milk-toast simpleton who needs so much hand-holding and spends all his time "doodling."

[Anonymous]

It's not actually the case that DC in private is a simpleton, so your snark is unnecessary, however good it might have made you feel. But one DC definitely tended to blend into the back row in big classes, rather than speak out. It was obvious quickly. And that DC also had the misfortune if having a teacher in second grade who had a lot of personal issues and didn't have the a energy to teach well that year (she ended up leaving the school). So one DC actually got dealt a worse hand in public school compared to the other DC. (Bad teachers can show up everywhere we have learned - it's not a public or private school issue). After smaller classes in private for a few years, DC is much more confident and outspoken academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not actually the case that DC in private is a simpleton, so your snark is unnecessary, however good it might have made you feel. But one DC definitely tended to blend into the back row in big classes, rather than speak out. It was obvious quickly. And that DC also had the misfortune if having a teacher in second grade who had a lot of personal issues and didn't have the a energy to teach well that year (she ended up leaving the school). So one DC actually got dealt a worse hand in public school compared to the other DC. (Bad teachers can show up everywhere we have learned - it's not a public or private school issue). After smaller classes in private for a few years, DC is much more confident and outspoken academically.

Fair enough that my response was snarky. I just see your comment though as uninformed and clearly slanted to puff up public schools. You have limited experience with just one child in one private school, so I don't see you as qualified to compare them across the board. It sounds like your particular child's tendency to be a back-bencher who needs hand-holding is what pushed you to send that particular child to his private school. And I'm glad it's working for him. But that doesn't mean that every child at private school is like that.

[Anonymous]

I was commenting on a type of kid who benefits from private school - and smaller class size definitely draws such kids out. I never said there weren't different kinds of kids in private school. Of course there are ... As just some categories, there are kids who have alumni as parents, there are kids who don't have good public options, there are kids of teachers because of convenience and/or tuition breaks, etc. And at DC's private, she is probably one if the more outspoken and outgoing kids ... Many kids are quieter and more shy even in smaller groups.

The question was whether public or private is more rigorous, particularly in lower grades. From my experience - which is confined to advanced academic programs in public - public is more rigorous. I think all good public/private schools generally catch up to each other in high school, with the exception that places like Blair and TJ have some more advanced options.