Independent schools and "advanced" kids: national problem?

[Anonymous]

Here's some more data. This is from the NEAP Data Explorer at the Dep't of Education's Nat'l Center for Education Statistics. Here is data on average 4th grade performance at public vs. private schools. It covers the three most recent years with data available.

Average math scores for 2009/2007/2003
Public: 239/239/234
Private: 246/246/244

Average math scores of the 90th percentile students for 2009/2007/2003 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 275/274/270
Private: 278/277/276

Average reading scores for 2007/2003/2002
Public: 220/216/213
Private: 234/235/234

Average reading scores of the 90th percentile students for 2007/2003/2002 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 263/262/261
Private: 272/274/273

I don't mean any of this as criticism of public schools, or boosting of private schools. I think both can provide good educational opportunities. I am offering this actual data to disprove the ridiculous claim that private schools are not capable of providing a strong education.

If anyone wants to explore this excellent database further, here is a link: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/dataset.aspx

[Anonymous]

Thank you for posting this. Does Takoma middle school refer to the magnet? Among the top independents in DC, I see Sidwell and NCS is up there, particularly the former. Green Acres, Bullis, and others show up although not as much. Where is St Albans, GDS, Maret? Did they not participate or does their math programs simply not match up to the requirement of this league? I am hoping that the poster who put up this information might know the answer.

Takoma middle school refers to the magnet program.

This performance phenomena is from elementary all the way up through the high school ranks:

MOEMS --- Mathcounts -----The Math League----AMC8 ------AMC10------AMC12------AIME----USAMO----National Merit Finalists---AP Scholar Honors----Siemens and Intel winners

(just to include a few)

One can also add Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Science Olympiads and many more national and international contests.

In yesteryear, this outside performance meant nothing compared to the near guarantee of an Ivy league education and a rich social network of connections for life. Those were high barriers to scale ...even for the best public schools. Today, with entitlements dying a slow death on the Ivy vine and higher demands for performance and accountability, private schools had better get off their laurels and innovate lest many will fold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's some more data. This is from the NEAP Data Explorer at the Dep't of Education's Nat'l Center for Education Statistics. Here is data on average 4th grade performance at public vs. private schools. It covers the three most recent years with data available.

Average math scores for 2009/2007/2003
Public: 239/239/234
Private: 246/246/244

Average math scores of the 90th percentile students for 2009/2007/2003 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 275/274/270
Private: 278/277/276

Average reading scores for 2007/2003/2002
Public: 220/216/213
Private: 234/235/234

Average reading scores of the 90th percentile students for 2007/2003/2002 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 263/262/261
Private: 272/274/273

I don't mean any of this as criticism of public schools, or boosting of private schools. I think both can provide good educational opportunities. I am offering this actual data to disprove the ridiculous claim that private schools are not capable of providing a strong education.

If anyone wants to explore this excellent database further, here is a link: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/dataset.aspx

People have looked at this data for a long time. The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are some recent math contest results for 6th, 7th, and 8th grades:
http://www.themathleague.com/downloads/nolastnames/MD-GS-NLN-0809.pdf

It seems some private schools have no trouble keeping up with even the math-magnet public schools.

Not impressed. BTW, it still doesn't mean that the schools are teaching well.

Of course you're not impressed -- it's actual data that doesn't fit your preconceived claim. I'll wait for you to post some counter-data.

Unless there is mandatory participation, it says nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

Please post some data to support your claims. You haven't backed up any of your claims on this whole thread. Put your money where your mouth is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's some more data. This is from the NEAP Data Explorer at the Dep't of Education's Nat'l Center for Education Statistics. Here is data on average 4th grade performance at public vs. private schools. It covers the three most recent years with data available.

Average math scores for 2009/2007/2003
Public: 239/239/234
Private: 246/246/244

Average math scores of the 90th percentile students for 2009/2007/2003 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 275/274/270
Private: 278/277/276

Average reading scores for 2007/2003/2002
Public: 220/216/213
Private: 234/235/234

Average reading scores of the 90th percentile students for 2007/2003/2002 (ie, the top 10% of the class)
Public: 263/262/261
Private: 272/274/273

I don't mean any of this as criticism of public schools, or boosting of private schools. I think both can provide good educational opportunities. I am offering this actual data to disprove the ridiculous claim that private schools are not capable of providing a strong education.

If anyone wants to explore this excellent database further, here is a link: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/dataset.aspx

People have looked at this data for a long time. The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

That's the thing - public school data includes data from low and underperforming students. If you compare apples to apples (middle & upper-middle class students) the stats would look different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

Please post some data to support your claims. You haven't backed up any of your claims on this whole thread. Put your money where your mouth is.

Please try to be polite.


http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP111.pdf

http://www.projectappleseed.org/public-private.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8743221/

Start with these, I might take the time to pull up some more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Of course you're not impressed -- it's actual data that doesn't fit your preconceived claim. I'll wait for you to post some counter-data.

Different poster here. Isn't the counter-data in your own link? TPMS beats the privates, only Sidwell comes close, and even then it's behind by a notch or two.

[Anonymous]

As I said before, private schools are going to have to start 'splainin'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course you're not impressed -- it's actual data that doesn't fit your preconceived claim. I'll wait for you to post some counter-data.

Different poster here. Isn't the counter-data in your own link? TPMS beats the privates, only Sidwell comes close, and even then it's behind by a notch or two.

Yes, that's right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

Please post some data to support your claims. You haven't backed up any of your claims on this whole thread. Put your money where your mouth is.

Please try to be polite.


http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP111.pdf

http://www.projectappleseed.org/public-private.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8743221/

Start with these, I might take the time to pull up some more.

Your argument seems to be shifting. Previously, someone (you?) was claiming that private schools cannot provide a solid education. Now, are you shifting to just claiming that public better, while recognizing that privates can provide solid education? If that's your new position, then maybe we're a little closer to agreeing. I'd agree that some publics are better than some privates. But I don't think it makes much sense to generalize, since each school is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course you're not impressed -- it's actual data that doesn't fit your preconceived claim. I'll wait for you to post some counter-data.

Different poster here. Isn't the counter-data in your own link? TPMS beats the privates, only Sidwell comes close, and even then it's behind by a notch or two.

It depends on what you're trying to claim. If your claim is that some public schools (for instance a math magnet like TPMS) can outperform all privates in math, you've got no argument from me. We're in agreement. But if your claim is that even top private schools provide sub-standard math education, then I think the contest results are inconsistent with your claim.

My view is that both private schools and public schools can (and do) provide solid education. I'd think that's not a very controversial position. But it seems like some on this thread were trying to claim that private schools cannot provide a solid education. I think they're flat wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that if you compare the private and public scores along lines of 5 socioeconomic classes, the public school scores are higher. That is upper class kids in public vs upper class kids in private, upper-middle...and so on. This data does not disprove anything.

Please post some data to support your claims. You haven't backed up any of your claims on this whole thread. Put your money where your mouth is.

Please try to be polite.


http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP111.pdf

http://www.projectappleseed.org/public-private.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8743221/

Start with these, I might take the time to pull up some more.

Your argument seems to be shifting. Previously, someone (you?) was claiming that private schools cannot provide a solid education. Now, are you shifting to just claiming that public better, while recognizing that privates can provide solid education? If that's your new position, then maybe we're a little closer to agreeing. I'd agree that some publics are better than some privates. But I don't think it makes much sense to generalize, since each school is different.

I was only pointing out that the data that look at average scores at public schools and private schools do not pull out the scores by socioeconomic status. When you do that, public school scores are higher.
I am not saying which is better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course you're not impressed -- it's actual data that doesn't fit your preconceived claim. I'll wait for you to post some counter-data.

Different poster here. Isn't the counter-data in your own link? TPMS beats the privates, only Sidwell comes close, and even then it's behind by a notch or two.

It depends on what you're trying to claim. If your claim is that some public schools (for instance a math magnet like TPMS) can outperform all privates in math, you've got no argument from me. We're in agreement. But if your claim is that even top private schools provide sub-standard math education, then I think the contest results are inconsistent with your claim.

My view is that both private schools and public schools can (and do) provide solid education. I'd think that's not a very controversial position. But it seems like some on this thread were trying to claim that private schools cannot provide a solid education. I think they're flat wrong.

Quick question: Did all the schools participate? Did all students participate? These academic contests are taken seriously by some schools, and completely ignored by others. What is our sample here?

[Anonymous]

Your argument seems to be shifting. Previously, someone (you?) was claiming that private schools cannot provide a solid education. Now, are you shifting to just claiming that public better, while recognizing that privates can provide solid education? If that's your new position, then maybe we're a little closer to agreeing. I'd agree that some publics are better than some privates. But I don't think it makes much sense to generalize, since each school is different.

I challenge you to retrieve the post claiming that private schools "cannot provide a solid education". Do not insinuate your conclusions as the words of other posters. Simply provide the quote.