Please enlighten us public school parents

[Anonymous]

To those that assert that private schools are universally better than DCPS's best publics, can you please articulate what it is about private school that makes it better than any public? I get the following things:

1) control of class sizes
2) ability to remove incompetent teachers
3) good cafeteria food

What curriculum or other aspects of the academic program are hands down far and away superior to any DCPS?

[Anonymous]

I have one child in public and one in private (both elementary school). The two big differences are class size and the availability of specials. Smaller class size means more personal attention, especially to the social/emotional things. More specials means a richer curriculum, including much more art and music. Relatedly, more P.E. and recess, which means way more opportunities for movement. I haven't seen a difference in teacher quality -- there are good and bad teachers everywhere and teachers that are a good or less good match for a particular kid everywhere.

That said, we have no plans to move our one kid out of public. Going to school with neighborhood friends and no commute is priceless to him and free tuition is priceless to us.

[Anonymous]

You should probably post this in the private forum.

But:

1) Glorious facilities and supplies - fields, locker rooms, theaters, kilns, huge libraries, filmmaking equipment
2) The ability to not only pick the best and brightest, but to kick out any kids that you want

[Anonymous]

I'm a public school parent and private school veteran, and I would say the most significant factor for those who strongly prefer private schools is that they have selective admissions -- you can be sure your kid's classmates will be smart and well-behaved.

The lack of bureaucracy is another factor that probably has real impact, but charter schools have leveled the playing field significantly in that respect.

[Anonymous]

So when you say "richer curriculum," you mean in art and music? Also, Are they spending significantly less time on core academics then with all the extra art, music, PE and recess?

Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You should probably post this in the private forum.

But:

1) Glorious facilities and supplies - fields, locker rooms, theaters, kilns, huge libraries, filmmaking equipment
2) The ability to not only pick the best and brightest, but to kick out any kids that you want

There are lots of private school parents on here that are making assertions on other threads, I wanted to tease this issue out of a specific comparison of a specific DCPS. So far, I am not particularly impressed with your list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should probably post this in the private forum.

But:

1) Glorious facilities and supplies - fields, locker rooms, theaters, kilns, huge libraries, filmmaking equipment
2) The ability to not only pick the best and brightest, but to kick out any kids that you want

There are lots of private school parents on here that are making assertions on other threads, I wanted to tease this issue out of a specific comparison of a specific DCPS. So far, I am not particularly impressed with your list.

Why don't you say what school?

[Anonymous]

Private schools also don't need to spend time teaching to, and taking, standardized tests.

There's greater freedom for teachers on curriculum, more attention as well as more feedback per kid and in general the ability to meet the kids where they are in any classroom.

--Public school parent who attended private schools and who thinks that while Privates are 5-10% better, the costs outweight the benefits.

[Anonymous]

Everything you listed, plus no testing. I can only speak to my personal experience, but I feel like public schools are more concerned with seeing kids pass than to see them excel. Private schools expect more from the students and parents. But there's absolutely disadvantages. Fewer extracurriculars, costs a ton, and little support for differentiated learning.

Neither model is better, really. It just depends on the kid.

[Anonymous]

In my experience, privates have an ability to not only meet each child where he or she is at the outset, but they have the flexibility and support to help each child thrive. There is way less admin BS. Learning through play in the younger grades and a focus on foundation building that serves the kids really well down the line.

[Anonymous]

Is it weird that I feel a little sguidgy about "glorious facilities"? Sure I want my kid to have clean surroundings and a lot of space to run, but it somehow seems sad and empty to think that the quality of their childhood depends on having a kiln on campus ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it weird that I feel a little sguidgy about "glorious facilities"? Sure I want my kid to have clean surroundings and a lot of space to run, but it somehow seems sad and empty to think that the quality of their childhood depends on having a kiln on campus ...

Personally I think the facilities are to woo the parents, not the kids. Assuming things are clean, functioning and the public school isn't missing critical elements like a gym, the facilities arms races is just for the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a public school parent and private school veteran, and I would say the most significant factor for those who strongly prefer private schools is that they have selective admissions -- you can be sure your kid's classmates will be smart and well-behaved.

The lack of bureaucracy is another factor that probably has real impact, but charter schools have leveled the playing field significantly in that respect.

Yes, well-behaved like Owen Labrie and the other boys from St. Paul's school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a public school parent and private school veteran, and I would say the most significant factor for those who strongly prefer private schools is that they have selective admissions -- you can be sure your kid's classmates will be smart and well-behaved.

The lack of bureaucracy is another factor that probably has real impact, but charter schools have leveled the playing field significantly in that respect.

+1 Selective admissions and ability to kick out kids who don't follow the rules for whatever reason and not having to teach to the test other than the SATs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should probably post this in the private forum.

But:

1) Glorious facilities and supplies - fields, locker rooms, theaters, kilns, huge libraries, filmmaking equipment
2) The ability to not only pick the best and brightest, but to kick out any kids that you want

There are lots of private school parents on here that are making assertions on other threads, I wanted to tease this issue out of a specific comparison of a specific DCPS. So far, I am not particularly impressed with your list.

Why don't you say what school?

It came up on the Janney Rules thread (which is kind of an obnoxious title I will totally concede), but the discussions expanded to about Janney, Mann, Ross, implied Brent, etc. There were statements that X school is as good as private and responses that equalled "you are kidding yourself if you think that."

I want to know what the difference really is. I personally think it is a hard thing to compare, but people do not seem afraid to make bald assertions so I am asking what is behind those. I suspect many private school parents have no idea what the good DC publics are like other than what is on the surface. Those that do (including some PPs in this thread) are enlightening.

FWIW, I am a Janney parent and the teachers do not teach to the test, nor is there any kind of significant pressure surrounding the tests. I also am very impressed with the breadth and depth of the curriculum. It is not canned and in particular both the writing and the math curriculums I would call progressive and thoughtful.