Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
Totally agree. Though be careful where else you look. Some of the wealthier towns on Long Island in particular are just as bad or worse, though in a slightly different way.
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
Totally agree. Though be careful where else you look. Some of the wealthier towns on Long Island in particular are just as bad or worse, though in a slightly different way.
Unfortunately moving to the suburbs isn't on the cards for us - both our jobs require us to be in the office 5 days a week and the commute would seriously cut down on our time with the kids. We have both our kids in our excellent zoned elementary school and have had a very good experience. We'll consider private for middle/high school once our kids' interests and abilities are clearer.
Anonymous wrote:I wasn’t being negative. It’s quite true that someone who doesn’t think Lawrenceville Prep would be “good” enough is not going to be happy with the Princeton public schools system. And I believe I am the only one on the thread who actually attended one of these two schools and is pretty familiar with the other.
Princeton is pretty sleepy but there are a few decent restaurants and a community theater. Only an hour to NY or Philly. Teenagers gravitate towards drinking parties in someone’s barn or guesthouse as there is not much else for them to do.
As opposed to Manhattan kids who drink (and do drugs) in bars, clubs, parks, and Hampton's houses?
No worries, there is plenty of coke and Adderall at Princeton High (and most other wealthy suburban high schools) so not escaping that by leaving the city. And yes, there are more non drinking/drug activities for teens in NYC.
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
Totally agree. Though be careful where else you look. Some of the wealthier towns on Long Island in particular are just as bad or worse, though in a slightly different way.
Unfortunately moving to the suburbs isn't on the cards for us - both our jobs require us to be in the office 5 days a week and the commute would seriously cut down on our time with the kids. We have both our kids in our excellent zoned elementary school and have had a very good experience. We'll consider private for middle/high school once our kids' interests and abilities are clearer.
Sounds familiar, though we made the go/no go decision before Covid, though it likely wouldn't have been different. If both parents work in Manhattan and need to be in most of the time, the suburbs are very difficult. At least one parent needs to be spending a significant amount of time on that side of the river. We similarly were fortunate to have a great public elementary and a very good public middle that made it all a lot easier. We flipped to private for HS but were very focused on culture rather than status.
Anonymous wrote:Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city and discuss it than the reverse, because there’s a whole range of passable suburbs with decent education that goes beyond what is mentioned here (Scarsdale Milburn etc, which is a very narrow slice of suburbia)
I dislike the suburbs but this just isn't true. I can easily afford living in the city, independent school etc. but if I could move to a rural area in the mountains I would do it in a heartbeat. Not everyone is enamored with city life.
So you dislike the suburbs and wouldn’t move to the city despite having the means. Guess you’re a tougher than average customer
Anonymous wrote:I wasn’t being negative. It’s quite true that someone who doesn’t think Lawrenceville Prep would be “good” enough is not going to be happy with the Princeton public schools system. And I believe I am the only one on the thread who actually attended one of these two schools and is pretty familiar with the other.
Princeton is pretty sleepy but there are a few decent restaurants and a community theater. Only an hour to NY or Philly. Teenagers gravitate towards drinking parties in someone’s barn or guesthouse as there is not much else for them to do.
As opposed to Manhattan kids who drink (and do drugs) in bars, clubs, parks, and Hampton's houses?
No worries, there is plenty of coke and Adderall at Princeton High (and most other wealthy suburban high schools) so not escaping that by leaving the city. And yes, there are more non drinking/drug activities for teens in NYC.
There is alcohol and drugs at every high school in America in spades. Don’t move somewhere to avoid that
Anonymous wrote:Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city and discuss it than the reverse, because there’s a whole range of passable suburbs with decent education that goes beyond what is mentioned here (Scarsdale Milburn etc, which is a very narrow slice of suburbia)
I dislike the suburbs but this just isn't true. I can easily afford living in the city, independent school etc. but if I could move to a rural area in the mountains I would do it in a heartbeat. Not everyone is enamored with city life.
So you dislike the suburbs and wouldn’t move to the city despite having the means. Guess you’re a tougher than average customer
I live in Manhattan and like it fine, but I love being out in nature more. I think there are a lot of people like me who are tied to the city for professional reasons but would move if they could work fully remote or retire early. Many of my friends in tech did just that after the pandemic.
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
“No one”? Try the Amish or orthodox. Or even your average Long Island or NJ town.
Anonymous wrote:Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city and discuss it than the reverse, because there’s a whole range of passable suburbs with decent education that goes beyond what is mentioned here (Scarsdale Milburn etc, which is a very narrow slice of suburbia)
I dislike the suburbs but this just isn't true. I can easily afford living in the city, independent school etc. but if I could move to a rural area in the mountains I would do it in a heartbeat. Not everyone is enamored with city life.
So you dislike the suburbs and wouldn’t move to the city despite having the means. Guess you’re a tougher than average customer
I live in Manhattan and like it fine, but I love being out in nature more. I think there are a lot of people like me who are tied to the city for professional reasons but would move if they could work fully remote or retire early. Many of my friends in tech did just that after the pandemic.
The question here isn’t city or move to Jackson WY or Woodstock VT. It is tristate suburbs or the city.
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
“No one”? Try the Amish or orthodox. Or even your average Long Island or NJ town.
Anonymous wrote:Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city and discuss it than the reverse, because there’s a whole range of passable suburbs with decent education that goes beyond what is mentioned here (Scarsdale Milburn etc, which is a very narrow slice of suburbia)
I dislike the suburbs but this just isn't true. I can easily afford living in the city, independent school etc. but if I could move to a rural area in the mountains I would do it in a heartbeat. Not everyone is enamored with city life.
So you dislike the suburbs and wouldn’t move to the city despite having the means. Guess you’re a tougher than average customer
I live in Manhattan and like it fine, but I love being out in nature more. I think there are a lot of people like me who are tied to the city for professional reasons but would move if they could work fully remote or retire early. Many of my friends in tech did just that after the pandemic.
The question here isn’t city or move to Jackson WY or Woodstock VT. It is tristate suburbs or the city.
There really is no right answer to this question. Pluses and minuses anyway you slice it. It's clearly an individual family discussion.
Anonymous wrote:I wasn’t being negative. It’s quite true that someone who doesn’t think Lawrenceville Prep would be “good” enough is not going to be happy with the Princeton public schools system. And I believe I am the only one on the thread who actually attended one of these two schools and is pretty familiar with the other.
Princeton is pretty sleepy but there are a few decent restaurants and a community theater. Only an hour to NY or Philly. Teenagers gravitate towards drinking parties in someone’s barn or guesthouse as there is not much else for them to do.
As opposed to Manhattan kids who drink (and do drugs) in bars, clubs, parks, and Hampton's houses?
There’s a party scene for kids who want that, but it’s not necessarily dominant and there are plenty of adventures to be had that don’t require cars, drugs, or alcohol.
Anonymous wrote:Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city and discuss it than the reverse, because there’s a whole range of passable suburbs with decent education that goes beyond what is mentioned here (Scarsdale Milburn etc, which is a very narrow slice of suburbia)
I dislike the suburbs but this just isn't true. I can easily afford living in the city, independent school etc. but if I could move to a rural area in the mountains I would do it in a heartbeat. Not everyone is enamored with city life.
So you dislike the suburbs and wouldn’t move to the city despite having the means. Guess you’re a tougher than average customer
I live in Manhattan and like it fine, but I love being out in nature more. I think there are a lot of people like me who are tied to the city for professional reasons but would move if they could work fully remote or retire early. Many of my friends in tech did just that after the pandemic.
The question here isn’t city or move to Jackson WY or Woodstock VT. It is tristate suburbs or the city.
The post I was replying to said:
"Suburbs and city are different lifestyles. Most people, if they have the money, choose the city but some don’t. You’ll have way more people in the suburbs want to move back to the city." I think that just isn't true - most people in the U.S. do not like city life and prefer to be near but not in the city. Is it so hard to believe that NYC (Manhattan) isn't the center of the universe?
Anonymous wrote:There will be smart classmates and good teachers at both. Downsides to public will be rote curriculum (current philosophy is to ensure consistency through control), teaching to the standardized test, larger class sizes, many of eliminated tracking/gifted programs at elementary and middle school levels, bureaucracy, populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources, worse overall college matriculation, grade inflation which makes it diffiuclt to stand out. Downsides to private are cost, more legacy/donor families, less economic diversity, usually no tracking at lower school level.
Hoo boy.
"Rote curriculum": no, the broad pedagogy is the same at both places, nobody's having you spend half of your time memorizing crap anymore.
"Teaching to the test": not really, though we did find that when we moved to NYC the teachers spent a lot more time teaching writing in general because that's a major component of the NY state exam. (but all year, and not specifically directed to state exam questions)
"Larger class sizes": suburbs barely have any gap with privates now - like 18 versus 22 - and the city is in the process of matching suburbs.
"Eliminated tracking/gifted programs": public schools do lots of tracking, if anything this more of a problem in private schools.
"Bureaucracy": seriously? how many associate deans of blahdeblah does your private school have?
"populations like ESL and special needs which take up a lot of resources": yeah, heaven forbid our kids are exposed to any of those people.
"worse overall college matriculation": sure, because the private schools have most of the rich kids.
"grade inflation": the modal GPA at Horace Mann is an A-.
Most suburban publics no longer track at elementary and sometimes middle it's an equity thing. Mamdani has already indicated that he plans to do this for the very youngest grades in NYC publics.
My private is entirely run by less about six people on campus and its a K-12. Every town has its own board of education with oversight of all schools within its boundaries. In contrast.the NYC public school employ 2254 people in central administration, that is, people who don't work at any partiuclar school and are just bureaucracy.
My kids have 10 to 12 kids in this classes at private, and never more than 15. Our local suburban school has 20 to 30 kids at a class, my kid's experience was on the higher end in elementary, which was when they attended.
AP classes in public schools are very geared towards the test. My kids spent considerable time in public elementary preparing for the state standardized tests. These tests were given at every grade level in the spring.
Nearly all suburban publics standardize their curriculum throughout the district so every class is reading the same books, and even doing the same worksheets, etc. . . again, I know this because my kids attended a suburban public and this is something that the teachers complained about a lot. The private my kids attend allows the teachers to develop their own curriculum each year as a grade level each year at the elemtary and middle school level, with some differences between classes.
The smartest, most successful people on the planet (rich New Yorkers) send their kids to private. Are they dumb or delusional for doing so? If you have the means, do likewise. And public can be fine, but please don't tell us it is known for less bureaucracy, smaller classes, more advanced material, and better networking than the TTs.
Again, people are making these ridiculous, very absolute statements. The world is not so black and white. Each has its pros and cons. Private has smaller classes, great resources, and usually more flexibility. And the resources of NYC. Some publics because of their size can offer more classes, more exposure to the real world, plenty of academic rigor, etc. They also have more government bureaucracy and less flexibility (which isn't always a bad thing, but often is)
I grew up in a very nice NJ suburb (but not Summit or Millburn, which are the two people like to cite). I went to high school with the children of several PhD Bell Labs researchers (look it up if you don't know it), multiple Columbia and NYU professors, and partners at top law firms. I did not grow up in Princeton but there are lots of incredibly smart Princeton professors and IAS researchers who send their kids to public schools in the area. There are plenty of very bright, successful (not sure how you define that) people who choose to live in the suburbs for whatever reasons. So these absolutist statements that all the smart people are in NYC are ignorant.
And looking at medians or means or whatever else for these schools is useless. Academically I lived in a bubble with the other kids who were at the top of my class. And those kids were just as smart and have accomplished just as much as the NYC private TT alums of my generation. But there were plenty of kids who were not as bright or motivated. And in HS these kids were not in my academic classes. And being exposed to them in homeroom, gym, activities, sports teams, etc. was a great life experience for me. And it has led me to learn to not be as narrow minded and judgy as some of the posters here who refuse to acknowledge anything good about the suburbs. Things have definitely changed at schools like this since then, probably more for the worse than the better (see how I can admit that my side is not without holes - try it sometime). But they still have a lot to offer for a highly motivated student and they will still do well, get into excellent schools and achieve there.
Note that I write this as a parent of a NYC private school student, who chose this school over SHSAT schools after being in excellent NYC public lower schools. So I have seen it all. Have you?
Yes, I went through public school system in Princeton. I got a very good education. Even so, inferior to what my kids got in private school in every respect. I also sent my kids to a wealthy suburban public elementary (rated 10/10 on best schools). Saw first hand that they were abandoning tracking, which is also happening in DC area schools and discussed frequently on this board (and being implemented by Mamdani in NY). Heard teachers complaining about curriculum being scripted by central office that they could not deviate from. Saw my kids spend lots of classroom time preparing for yearly state proficiency tests, even doing mock questions on a regular basis. Neither my kids or I had a class size smaller than 25 kids.
OP here, thank you so much for sharing this. I believe your experience is probably the most instructive to the choice we're evaluating (Princeton public vs. NYC TT). I just have two questions: 1. Do you feel that the educational experience in Princeton publics would have materially changed since you had attended (e.g. less tracking, more ESL / special needs, etc.)? 2. Do you feel that the degree to which your children's experience in private school has been better than public (in learning environment, learned material, network benefits, etc.) is dramatic enough to lead to definitively different life outcomes?
We're really struggling with the decision. We (but not the kids) prefer the suburban lifestyle but it'd really kill us to know that we sacrificed something that could have been very positively significant for their life trajectory, especially since we can comfortable afford the tuition.
Yes, I feel that public school today is materially different than three decades ago. The biggest difference is teaching to the test, I went to school in the days before No Child Left Behind, so we didn’t “practice” or learn things for the yearly state assessments, and APs were not a big thing, so teachers could design the curriculum for advanced classes themselves. ESL has grown a ton in Princeton, there was always a very small low income population, but no real Hispanic population, now it is almost ten percent of the high school population, nearly all recent immigrants. Special needs were not mainstreamed, I really think, for better or worse, that handling kids with behavior problems, whether normal track or special needs, takes a lot of teacher time. It just isn’t possible to remove kids from the classroom anymore. Private schools are usually pretty quick to suspend kids or to counsel them out. There is a real grinder population at the high school level that didn’t exist when I was there — the larger area has become very popular with highly ambitious, highly educated immigrants because of the quality of the public schools. High school suicides are an issue, not necessarily limited to Princeton, but also at the West Windsor and other local highly regarded public schools
Who can say what makes a material difference in a kid’s life? I intended to keep my kids in public school through at least elementary, bought a house zoned for the highest regarded elementary in our area, and pulled my kids before the oldest finished. As I said before, Princeton has many local private schools, some of which are excellent, so you have that as a back up.
Okay so if we understand you ....you want to remove yourself and your kids from the special needs population, the immigrant population both spanish-speaking and non-spanish-speaking, the "grinder" population....I guess that leaves the affluent white folks? Isn't that already who you're currently hanging with I don't know late private school? So why are you going through the hassle of moving?
Not the PP, but wow do you really have to be this toxic?
For context, I'm both Asian and had a younger sibling with autism who I helped raise for much of my own childhood. I've actually never believed in integrating special needs kids wholesale and certainly would not want my own kids in a class where the teacher would be stretched between accommodating someone like my sibling and my kids at the same time. I literally would not know nor could I imagine how that could be done.
Secondly, as an Asian parent who 100% believes in setting high expectations the immigrant grinder mindset is great at achieving a high grades but not so much when it comes to actually learning or developing critical thinking. Take it from someone who have seen peers literally on IV drip in order to stay up and prep for the college entrance exam, you do not want this.
Ok. Public schools are funded by all of the tax payers. When different groups are getting different treatment and different opportunities, that also causes a lot of issues. They need to support struggling students and enrich the advanced students. There is no "counseling out" of any eligible child, nor should there be.
If poster come on here raving about the best and most successful people in the world go to nyc private schools, they should expect some pushback and they deserve it .
What is untrue about that statement? UHNW people disproportionately send their children to private schools and they disproportionately live in NYC.
Yes! They went to those schools because they are the greatest and their kids are the greatest and go to those schools and then their kids are going to be the greatest and go to those schools. These folks need to avoid public schools.
No one is more insular and parochial than rich Manhattanites (proud transplant here). The lack of empathy and curiosity in the average TT parent is the reason why we have no interest in independent schools despite being, by some measures, professionally succesful and able to afford them.
“No one”? Try the Amish or orthodox. Or even your average Long Island or NJ town.
Don't forget Westchester.
True with Westchester, although less severe. Take any nice LI suburb like Manhasset or Oyster Bay. There are legit “townies” with DUIs, eight kids, no college, pick ups, and they become grandparents in their late 30s. When you go to the more middle of the road towns it’s gets more common.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}