Where is the fat in private schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare to Catholic schools that charge and actually operate on ~15K/student, you realize that the fat is in the facilities and admin pay. Catholics school buildings are usually owned by the parish, so that is “free” to them. They’re not otherwise subsidized to the extent people think they are. For the most part they make do with less.

It's not easy to tell how the funding works for Catholic schools because churches get a lot of privacy, but for sure you can't just compare tuition rates and pretend that's spending.

They often also utilize the wildly underpaid labor of priests and nuns and often underpay non clergy employees as well... it's just not comparable financially

The few (Arlington Diocese)!Catholic schools we have visited do not have any nuns (but did a long time ago) and do not have clergy teaching anything other than the religion classes. There must be some somewhere, but not at any Catholic ES near us.

True. No nuns or clergy at any of the schools we have attended. Does the PP know what they are talking about?

Lol nothing but religion class, but don't know what I'm talking about. Yes my darling, I know and am Catholic/Catholic educated/my mother was a Catholic school teacher and have many close family friends who are current Catholic school teachers. They are mostly used in administrative positions these days but that is still underpaid labor and typically Catholic school teachers are underpaid as well. The ones who don't, you'll see it in the tuition.

So you are walking back your “often”?

Not at all, I'm pointing out that even in your rebuttal you pointed to the accuracy of my statement. You are ridiculous in your defense. Catholic schools pricing can't be compared to other independent schools because they are set up completely differently and rely on underpaid people to run them. And everyone got offended because they aren't exclusively nuns and priests teaching which is NOT what I said. In fact, you all gave away that you do see nuns and priests in the building, which confirms that my statement was accurate, but you wanted to put a caveat around it prove what exactly? It is just a different game. Take the win, your tuition is lower and other private schools can't compete because they don't have the same fundamental structure. It isn't a negative critique of you that you have a more affordable system. It's just a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare to Catholic schools that charge and actually operate on ~15K/student, you realize that the fat is in the facilities and admin pay. Catholics school buildings are usually owned by the parish, so that is “free” to them. They’re not otherwise subsidized to the extent people think they are. For the most part they make do with less.

It's not easy to tell how the funding works for Catholic schools because churches get a lot of privacy, but for sure you can't just compare tuition rates and pretend that's spending.

They often also utilize the wildly underpaid labor of priests and nuns and often underpay non clergy employees as well... it's just not comparable financially

The few (Arlington Diocese)!Catholic schools we have visited do not have any nuns (but did a long time ago) and do not have clergy teaching anything other than the religion classes. There must be some somewhere, but not at any Catholic ES near us.

True. No nuns or clergy at any of the schools we have attended. Does the PP know what they are talking about?

Lol nothing but religion class, but don't know what I'm talking about. Yes my darling, I know and am Catholic/Catholic educated/my mother was a Catholic school teacher and have many close family friends who are current Catholic school teachers. They are mostly used in administrative positions these days but that is still underpaid labor and typically Catholic school teachers are underpaid as well. The ones who don't, you'll see it in the tuition.

So you are walking back your “often”?

Not at all, I'm pointing out that even in your rebuttal you pointed to the accuracy of my statement. You are ridiculous in your defense. Catholic schools pricing can't be compared to other independent schools because they are set up completely differently and rely on underpaid people to run them. And everyone got offended because they aren't exclusively nuns and priests teaching which is NOT what I said. In fact, you all gave away that you do see nuns and priests in the building, which confirms that my statement was accurate, but you wanted to put a caveat around it prove what exactly? It is just a different game. Take the win, your tuition is lower and other private schools can't compete because they don't have the same fundamental structure. It isn't a negative critique of you that you have a more affordable system. It's just a fact.

Do they often use priests and nuns? Not these days. There aren’t enough of them. Underpaid teachers and staff, agree. But not priests and nuns.

[Anonymous]

Catholic schools do not pay 1 million dollars to the head of school.

[Anonymous]

You could probably see this in their annual report.

Largely physical plant and capital improvements.

If you mean compared to public school though, I mean, it's everything. Is something nice or nicer? That.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Somehow I don’t think Catholic k-8s are charging the “exorbitant” tuition OP refers to.

Where do the $60k/yr schools put all that money?

That’s not the point. Many Catholic schools are not paying a living wage to their teachers - that is why the tuition is so cheap.

[Anonymous]

Given how much better kept and better run private schools seem to be, with smaller class sizes, I think the administrative salaries are justifiable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given how much better kept and better run private schools seem to be, with smaller class sizes, I think the administrative salaries are justifiable.

But should they be paid considerably more than the teachers, who are the ones directly doing the work?

If a school had to do without its administrators or its teachers for a week, which would be the more noticeable absence? Doesn’t that speak to the value of their jobs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given how much better kept and better run private schools seem to be, with smaller class sizes, I think the administrative salaries are justifiable.

But should they be paid considerably more than the teachers, who are the ones directly doing the work?

If a school had to do without its administrators or its teachers for a week, which would be the more noticeable absence? Doesn’t that speak to the value of their jobs?

If the teachers left for a week, the administrators would hire new ones. Yes, I would like to see teachers be paid more. No, I don’t have a problem with administrators being paid well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare to Catholic schools that charge and actually operate on ~15K/student, you realize that the fat is in the facilities and admin pay. Catholics school buildings are usually owned by the parish, so that is “free” to them. They’re not otherwise subsidized to the extent people think they are. For the most part they make do with less.

It's not easy to tell how the funding works for Catholic schools because churches get a lot of privacy, but for sure you can't just compare tuition rates and pretend that's spending.

They often also utilize the wildly underpaid labor of priests and nuns and often underpay non clergy employees as well... it's just not comparable financially

The few (Arlington Diocese)!Catholic schools we have visited do not have any nuns (but did a long time ago) and do not have clergy teaching anything other than the religion classes. There must be some somewhere, but not at any Catholic ES near us.

True. No nuns or clergy at any of the schools we have attended. Does the PP know what they are talking about?

Lol nothing but religion class, but don't know what I'm talking about. Yes my darling, I know and am Catholic/Catholic educated/my mother was a Catholic school teacher and have many close family friends who are current Catholic school teachers. They are mostly used in administrative positions these days but that is still underpaid labor and typically Catholic school teachers are underpaid as well. The ones who don't, you'll see it in the tuition.

So you are walking back your “often”?

Not at all, I'm pointing out that even in your rebuttal you pointed to the accuracy of my statement. You are ridiculous in your defense. Catholic schools pricing can't be compared to other independent schools because they are set up completely differently and rely on underpaid people to run them. And everyone got offended because they aren't exclusively nuns and priests teaching which is NOT what I said. In fact, you all gave away that you do see nuns and priests in the building, which confirms that my statement was accurate, but you wanted to put a caveat around it prove what exactly? It is just a different game. Take the win, your tuition is lower and other private schools can't compete because they don't have the same fundamental structure. It isn't a negative critique of you that you have a more affordable system. It's just a fact.

I don't know why you're harping on about Catholic school teachers, nuns, whomever being underpaid. This is true at most all independent schools. Yes, even the ones where tuition is 60k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare to Catholic schools that charge and actually operate on ~15K/student, you realize that the fat is in the facilities and admin pay. Catholics school buildings are usually owned by the parish, so that is “free” to them. They’re not otherwise subsidized to the extent people think they are. For the most part they make do with less.

It's not easy to tell how the funding works for Catholic schools because churches get a lot of privacy, but for sure you can't just compare tuition rates and pretend that's spending.

They often also utilize the wildly underpaid labor of priests and nuns and often underpay non clergy employees as well... it's just not comparable financially

The few (Arlington Diocese)!Catholic schools we have visited do not have any nuns (but did a long time ago) and do not have clergy teaching anything other than the religion classes. There must be some somewhere, but not at any Catholic ES near us.

True. No nuns or clergy at any of the schools we have attended. Does the PP know what they are talking about?

Lol nothing but religion class, but don't know what I'm talking about. Yes my darling, I know and am Catholic/Catholic educated/my mother was a Catholic school teacher and have many close family friends who are current Catholic school teachers. They are mostly used in administrative positions these days but that is still underpaid labor and typically Catholic school teachers are underpaid as well. The ones who don't, you'll see it in the tuition.

So you are walking back your “often”?

Not at all, I'm pointing out that even in your rebuttal you pointed to the accuracy of my statement. You are ridiculous in your defense. Catholic schools pricing can't be compared to other independent schools because they are set up completely differently and rely on underpaid people to run them. And everyone got offended because they aren't exclusively nuns and priests teaching which is NOT what I said. In fact, you all gave away that you do see nuns and priests in the building, which confirms that my statement was accurate, but you wanted to put a caveat around it prove what exactly? It is just a different game. Take the win, your tuition is lower and other private schools can't compete because they don't have the same fundamental structure. It isn't a negative critique of you that you have a more affordable system. It's just a fact.

I don't know why you're harping on about Catholic school teachers, nuns, whomever being underpaid. This is true at most all independent schools. Yes, even the ones where tuition is 60k.

My kids’ ADW Catholic school has 0 nuns or priests teaching (or doing background admin 😂) and they pay 85% of what MCPS pays its teachers while only charging ~15K a year. They get about 30K TOTAL from the archdiocese each year and a free building that they have to pay to maintain.

There is plenty of fat to cut from any school that charges 60K. The Catholic schools show that, and so do the other private independents in other areas of the country that only charge 25-40K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Privates in DMV have unbelievable numbers of administrative staff. No wonder tuition is so high. You don’t need all these development, communication, head of middle school people. It’s crazy.

Our head of middle school.took another role and was not replaced (he's supposedly covering both roles, but not well) - it's a noticeable difference and probably my biggest source of dissatisfaction with the school right now.

Families pay for services. If you cut all the things that aren't "necessary" to run a school, you are not left with a school anyone will pay to attend.

[Anonymous]

Our school district spends about $30k/pupil. Our private has classes that are less than half the size, and offers a ton more specials classes, so that alone requires a ton more teachers per pupil than a public. Then add in the resources, including the physical buildings, materials for the specials, instruments, technology, learning specialists and unlimited additional training for the teachers, and it actually seems like our private is a better deal and spends its funds more efficiently than our local public district does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given how much better kept and better run private schools seem to be, with smaller class sizes, I think the administrative salaries are justifiable.

But should they be paid considerably more than the teachers, who are the ones directly doing the work?

If a school had to do without its administrators or its teachers for a week, which would be the more noticeable absence? Doesn’t that speak to the value of their jobs?

If the teachers left for a week, the administrators would hire new ones. Yes, I would like to see teachers be paid more. No, I don’t have a problem with administrators being paid well.

No, the school would shut down without its teachers. The school can function without its administrators.

You pay for instruction, which is provided by teachers.

[Anonymous]

It’s interesting how private school pricing is being framed like a requirement when families are choosing into this model. If it doesn’t align for you, the area public schools are pretty solid, along with plenty of other school options.

[Anonymous]

Admin salaries.