what do you say to neighbors about why you are choosing private vs the local public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

In addition, there are some 2nd and 3rd rate private schools that offer inferior academics to those offered at top area publics.

Not even 2nd and 3rd rate. I taught in a private that was considered one of the top private schools in Seattle. Tuition was about $32,000 a year. I was still in school. I didn't even have a Bachelors Degree at the time. The parents had no idea that their 2nd graders were being taught by a teacher with no degree and no experience other than a semester of student teaching. That would never happen in any public school.

You post on a lot of threads. What were you – a teacher's aide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am the original poster - and no, not a snob, and was hoping to get answers that had nothing to do with snobery or money, bc it's not about that. It's about thinking that the education your kids will get (and what that affords in life - take that how you want) will be superior than what the public system offers, and the price attached to that is that you need to pay for it. It is quite simple. But not all people can handle that answer.

That is: "We chose the private school because it's better than that public school you send your children to."

If you're wondering why the neighbors react as though you were criticizing them -- it's because you are criticizing them.

This is the root of the problem. Yes, private school parents sacrifice to pay for private schools because we believe the school we've chosen provides better opportunities than the local public. If we didn't think so, why would we pay so much? But it's YOU who choose to treat that as criticism of your children and your choices. It's your insecurity that's the problem. My choices are simply my choices, not criticism of yours.

There is a difference between "We thought this private school would work better for our child" and "The public school education your child is getting is not good enough for my child". The former is not criticism of the neighbors; the latter is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I taught in a private that was considered one of the top private schools in Seattle. Tuition was about $32,000 a year. I was still in school. I didn't even have a Bachelors Degree at the time. The parents had no idea that their 2nd graders were being taught by a teacher with no degree and no experience other than a semester of student teaching. That would never happen in any public school.

I am skeptical. I just checked a couple of the top private schools in Seattle (Lakeside and Eastside Prep), and even today, their tuitions are nowhere close to $32k. I smell BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I taught in a private that was considered one of the top private schools in Seattle. Tuition was about $32,000 a year. I was still in school. I didn't even have a Bachelors Degree at the time. The parents had no idea that their 2nd graders were being taught by a teacher with no degree and no experience other than a semester of student teaching. That would never happen in any public school.

I am skeptical. I just checked a couple of the top private schools in Seattle (Lakeside and Eastside Prep), and even today, their tuitions are nowhere close to $32k. I smell BS.

Bush School tuition is $29,000. Lakeside School tuition is $29,000.

http://www.bush.edu/tuitionandfinancialaid
http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=142934&rc=0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The public school just didn't offer as many silent auctions"

PP here, this response is better!

I love this.

I also use, "They serve wine before parent teacher conferences. Everyone loves everyone."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is the root of the problem. Yes, private school parents sacrifice to pay for private schools because we believe the school we've chosen provides better opportunities than the local public. If we didn't think so, why would we pay so much? But it's YOU who choose to treat that as criticism of your children and your choices. It's your insecurity that's the problem. My choices are simply my choices, not criticism of yours.

There is a difference between "We thought this private school would work better for our child" and "The public school education your child is getting is not good enough for my child". The former is not criticism of the neighbors; the latter is.

But that's your inner insecurity that's generating the latter message, not me. We all know most of the public schools around here are good. But if I can afford something I think is better, why can't I make that choice without criticism from you?

I'm not even saying you have to agree with me that my child's private school is better. You can think whatever you want and make whatever choices work best for you. I don't judge you for your choices, so quit judging me for mine.

Fwiw, the worst part about sending my kids to private school (aside from the tuition payments) is the judgment I deal with from some people. Relatively few will say negative things, but it's been enough to make me uncomfortable when neighborhood conversations turn to what school my children attend. OP, many people have offered good suggestions on how to deflect the question tactfully. I'd suggest adopting some of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I taught in a private that was considered one of the top private schools in Seattle. Tuition was about $32,000 a year. I was still in school. I didn't even have a Bachelors Degree at the time. The parents had no idea that their 2nd graders were being taught by a teacher with no degree and no experience other than a semester of student teaching. That would never happen in any public school.

I am skeptical. I just checked a couple of the top private schools in Seattle (Lakeside and Eastside Prep), and even today, their tuitions are nowhere close to $32k. I smell BS.

Bush School tuition is $29,000. Lakeside School tuition is $29,000.

http://www.bush.edu/tuitionandfinancialaid
http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=142934&rc=0

Well, 28,650 and 28,500, if you want to be accurate. Either way, significantly less than 32,000, especially when you consider that the supposed Seattle teacher aide worked there in some prior year when tuition was lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is a difference between "We thought this private school would work better for our child" and "The public school education your child is getting is not good enough for my child". The former is not criticism of the neighbors; the latter is.

But that's your inner insecurity that's generating the latter message, not me. We all know most of the public schools around here are good. But if I can afford something I think is better, why can't I make that choice without criticism from you?

I'm not even saying you have to agree with me that my child's private school is better. You can think whatever you want and make whatever choices work best for you. I don't judge you for your choices, so quit judging me for mine.

Fwiw, the worst part about sending my kids to private school (aside from the tuition payments) is the judgment I deal with from some people. Relatively few will say negative things, but it's been enough to make me uncomfortable when neighborhood conversations turn to what school my children attend. OP, many people have offered good suggestions on how to deflect the question tactfully. I'd suggest adopting some of them.

No, actually, it's not my inner insecurity. I am very satisfied with the public school education my children are getting. I have zero desire to send them to a private school. And I think it's interesting that you seem to assume that I wish that I could send them to a private school.

So I will just say, again: your sending your child to private school is not criticism of my sending my child to public school.

But your (or, in any case, the OP's) saying, "Your child's school is not good enough for my child" -- that's criticism. And the OP shouldn't be surprised that people have prickly responses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I taught in a private that was considered one of the top private schools in Seattle. Tuition was about $32,000 a year. I was still in school. I didn't even have a Bachelors Degree at the time. The parents had no idea that their 2nd graders were being taught by a teacher with no degree and no experience other than a semester of student teaching. That would never happen in any public school.

I am skeptical. I just checked a couple of the top private schools in Seattle (Lakeside and Eastside Prep), and even today, their tuitions are nowhere close to $32k. I smell BS.

Bush School tuition is $29,000. Lakeside School tuition is $29,000.

http://www.bush.edu/tuitionandfinancialaid
http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=142934&rc=0

Well, 28,650 and 28,500, if you want to be accurate. Either way, significantly less than 32,000, especially when you consider that the supposed Seattle teacher aide worked there in some prior year when tuition was lower.

Oh well, I don't know. Probably by the time you add in fees, it's $32,000. And for all we know, the Seattle private-school teaching PP taught there only a few years ago.

[Anonymous]

I avoid the conversation. But if they persist I say, "My child needs a smaller class and extra help." No one argues with this statement as it sounds like my child isn't as smart as their child. They feel good about their decision and feel their child is better than mine. I have come to accept this area is full of assholes.

[Anonymous]

I think this entire discussion boils down to one thing: choice.

In the context of school, choice is a skewed concept b/c choice is only available with money (or access to financial aid in the absence of enough money).

If all families had a certain amount (a voucher, so to speak and yes, I know that's a loaded term) to "use" for school then everyone public, private, charter would feel much more empowered that they were CHOOSING their school (rather than accepting their default school).

For, example, assume every family gets a voucher of $40k (fantasy, not real money so don't get caught up in the real-life budgeting issues). One family might well decide that they'll "spend" their voucher on Sidwell or StA or whatever. B/c the tuition is so high, they would essentially have no voucher $ left over.

On the other hand, another family may decide their local public or charter is equally good (or better), so they don't have to spend any of their voucher money (b/c in this fantasy scenario public and charter are "free"). That family would be able to "bank" their $40k voucher money in order to use if for college.

Hmmm, wouldn't that be an interesting scenario? It would suddenly allow ALL parents to CHOOSE what is best for their kids and to think critically about where to spend their education dollars. It would also eliminate these petty arguments about who goes where to school b/c everyone would be empowered by their choice.

[Anonymous]

Interesting thought 11:12. To extend it further, what if the vouchers were not bankable? People could simply send their child to whatever school admits the child, public or private, and the cost is essentially zero. I wonder which schools people would choose if they had that choice.

[Anonymous]

In some areas there is genuine curiosity as to why people would pay a premium to live in a suburb with top public schools and then pay for private school tuition on top of it. There's a bit of a "I'll have fries with that Whopper" quality to it. If you live in DC and send your kids to private, or live in PG and send your kids to parochial, no one will bat an eye.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Hmmm, wouldn't that be an interesting scenario? It would suddenly allow ALL parents to CHOOSE what is best for their kids and to think critically about where to spend their education dollars. It would also eliminate these petty arguments about who goes where to school b/c everyone would be empowered by their choice.

Another interesting scenario -- if there were no such thing as private schools, a la Finland. Or if there were no such thing as private schools, and everybody were assigned to public school via lottery, a la Warren Buffett.

In the real world, "choice" models tend mostly to empower people who already have power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

In the real world, "choice" models tend mostly to empower people who already have power.

And models without choice tend to enable suppliers to ignore the needs/desires of consumers.