Private schools are indefensible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On a tangent, what was the story with those Sidwell college counselors? Flanagan tells the side of the story about some insane parents driving them out, but I’ve also read many posts here on DCUM around that period and after about how that group of college counselors was really subpar. What’s the story there? I’m guessing the reality is a lot more mixed than either story portrays it.

The parents acted inappropriately, but they were acting out of frustration of the inept counselors the school hired and defended.

Those counselors are gone, the kids and those parents are gone, it is an old story being rehashed again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The article deals with the most elite private schools. There are many private schools that aren't elite and where the gap between what is offered at the public schools aren't that great.

Exactly. Drawing the line at "public" vs. "private" is dumb. My kids go to a small religious private school where a good chunk of the student body is lower-income. The school is not academically selective. Full tuition is about half the cost of the upper tier privates in my city, and out of pocket costs after school vouchers are about $6K per kid. Families who earn less than 250% of the federal poverty level attend for free.

The democratic party wants to eliminate organized religions as well as wealthy people - so the effect is the same.

[Anonymous]

I actually agree with the author (whom I know nothing about). Objectively schools, especially those strongly left leaning such as GDS and Sidwell ( and people have said on this board that Holton has swung aggressively in the same direction) are in fact a complete contradiction. They have aggressively embraced what I will describe as hyper-liberalism, and yet charge circa $50,000 per child, per year to attend school. This does not feel like the "equality" they espouse. Can anyone not see the inherent contradiction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The article deals with the most elite private schools. There are many private schools that aren't elite and where the gap between what is offered at the public schools aren't that great.

Exactly. Drawing the line at "public" vs. "private" is dumb. My kids go to a small religious private school where a good chunk of the student body is lower-income. The school is not academically selective. Full tuition is about half the cost of the upper tier privates in my city, and out of pocket costs after school vouchers are about $6K per kid. Families who earn less than 250% of the federal poverty level attend for free.

Flanagan is clearly talking about "independent schools," which are subset of private schools, e.g., NAIS members. (Most Catholic, parochial schools wouldn't fit under this category, although schools may have a religious affiliation.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was disappointed in this article, actually. We are new to private school this year (covid) and have done a lot of hand-wringing over whether moving to, or staying in, private school aligns with our values. So I came to this with an open mind and read the whole thing.

Unfortunately this is just a string of anecdotes about the excesses of very wealthy parents. It does not make arguments against private schools, other than that there's a huge equity problem in education. The author waits until the final paragraphs to acknowledge that public schools are broken, and that in a just society private schools wouldn't need to exist. Another way of saying that is that the school situation is a symptom not the problem.

A better article would have looked like this:
1. The state of public schools is indefensible.
2. The existence of private schools is a response to the state of public schools and, even more, to the inequalities we have created while pretending that merit drives success.
3. Both 1 and 2 are the result of profound disagreements in this country about what school is for, and what we are all obligated to do in support of the public good.

There will always be very wealthy, very demanding parents who provide something different for their kids -- in the old days, these people's children were educated at home with governors and tutors. Their existence doesn't need to affect education policy one way or the other, which is why this article's focus on them is disappointing.

number 2 is demonstrably false. Privates have existed for as long as there have been schools in this country- the oldest literally predate the county.

The fact they're old doesn't mean they aren't a response to inequality. If there is no public school at all, or if the public school is a one-room school house that serves a whole region, then a private school is still a reaction to that lack of public investment in education.

I agree with prior PP mostly except for part of #2. Private schools were not create in response to a lack of investment in education, but because education has always been used a means to separate individuals both by class, gender, and race. But otherwise completely agree.

[Anonymous]

So, many of these schools are fueling the inequality that their missions say they are trying to combat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the increased percentage coming form private schools can at least be partially explained by the applicant pool. Not all public school students are applying to college. I would guess that a greater percentage of private school students are applying to college. What percent of college applications are from public versus private? Then look at whether the percent accepted is disproportionate.

Of course. And how many kids at Yale come from strong public schools? I bet her 2% vs 25% stat falls apart with a more nuanced analysis. She is trying to make money off of class warfare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually agree with the author (whom I know nothing about). Objectively schools, especially those strongly left leaning such as GDS and Sidwell ( and people have said on this board that Holton has swung aggressively in the same direction) are in fact a complete contradiction. They have aggressively embraced what I will describe as hyper-liberalism, and yet charge circa $50,000 per child, per year to attend school. This does not feel like the "equality" they espouse. Can anyone not see the inherent contradiction?

So, would you rather these wealthy schools produce defenders of self-interested, unapologetic, right wing capitalists? What is it that you are proposing? Private schools are not going away.

As a liberal parent who sends my kids to a Big-3, I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of a "private school with a public mission," but I'd much rather have my kids grow up believing that they have responsibilities to people other than themselves rather than the alternative. There is a sense that with this amazing education, you're supposed to go out there and do some good in the world.
And the author presents the worst of these schools, I hope you are aware. The anecdotes aren't made-up, but they are caricatures that are far, far from the typical, nondescript interactions that make up the private school world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the increased percentage coming form private schools can at least be partially explained by the applicant pool. Not all public school students are applying to college. I would guess that a greater percentage of private school students are applying to college. What percent of college applications are from public versus private? Then look at whether the percent accepted is disproportionate.

Of course. And how many kids at Yale come from strong public schools? I bet her 2% vs 25% stat falls apart with a more nuanced analysis. She is trying to make money off of class warfare.

don't forget to factor out all the rural privates that barely provide an education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually agree with the author (whom I know nothing about). Objectively schools, especially those strongly left leaning such as GDS and Sidwell ( and people have said on this board that Holton has swung aggressively in the same direction) are in fact a complete contradiction. They have aggressively embraced what I will describe as hyper-liberalism, and yet charge circa $50,000 per child, per year to attend school. This does not feel like the "equality" they espouse. Can anyone not see the inherent contradiction?

So, would you rather these wealthy schools produce defenders of self-interested, unapologetic, right wing capitalists? What is it that you are proposing? Private schools are not going away.

As a liberal parent who sends my kids to a Big-3, I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of a "private school with a public mission," but I'd much rather have my kids grow up believing that they have responsibilities to people other than themselves rather than the alternative. There is a sense that with this amazing education, you're supposed to go out there and do some good in the world.
And the author presents the worst of these schools, I hope you are aware. The anecdotes aren't made-up, but they are caricatures that are far, far from the typical, nondescript interactions that make up the private school world.

botching like a strong dose of paternalism to complement elitism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually agree with the author (whom I know nothing about). Objectively schools, especially those strongly left leaning such as GDS and Sidwell ( and people have said on this board that Holton has swung aggressively in the same direction) are in fact a complete contradiction. They have aggressively embraced what I will describe as hyper-liberalism, and yet charge circa $50,000 per child, per year to attend school. This does not feel like the "equality" they espouse. Can anyone not see the inherent contradiction?

So, would you rather these wealthy schools produce defenders of self-interested, unapologetic, right wing capitalists? What is it that you are proposing? Private schools are not going away.

As a liberal parent who sends my kids to a Big-3, I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of a "private school with a public mission," but I'd much rather have my kids grow up believing that they have responsibilities to people other than themselves rather than the alternative. There is a sense that with this amazing education, you're supposed to go out there and do some good in the world.
And the author presents the worst of these schools, I hope you are aware. The anecdotes aren't made-up, but they are caricatures that are far, far from the typical, nondescript interactions that make up the private school world.

botching like a strong dose of paternalism to complement elitism

What do you propose as the alternative? If you have smart, competent, well-educated kids who want to do some good in the world, what do you suggest they do? Because if these kids don't end up assuming leadership positions, you're going to find a society let by right-wing idiots who don't believe in science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the point of this article, written by a woman who sent her own children to an elite independent school? She and Bari Weiss deserve each other, trying to make a spectacle out of private schools, which while they certainly have their faults, end up producing students who succeed in college. Flanagan is trying to make a spectacle out of independent schools to, what, make public school parents feel better? To shame private school parents for wanting an excellent education for their children - perhaps even more so given the poor performance of many public school systems during the pandemic?

Is that what you got out of reading this article? No wonder this country is the way it is.

It’s as if you refuse to see the *spirit* of the message.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the point of this article, written by a woman who sent her own children to an elite independent school? She and Bari Weiss deserve each other, trying to make a spectacle out of private schools, which while they certainly have their faults, end up producing students who succeed in college. Flanagan is trying to make a spectacle out of independent schools to, what, make public school parents feel better? To shame private school parents for wanting an excellent education for their children - perhaps even more so given the poor performance of many public school systems during the pandemic?

Is that what you got out of reading this article? No wonder this country is the way it is.

It’s as if you refuse to see the *spirit* of the message.

Hi, Caitlin! Sorry we're not sympathetic to your screed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the point of this article, written by a woman who sent her own children to an elite independent school? She and Bari Weiss deserve each other, trying to make a spectacle out of private schools, which while they certainly have their faults, end up producing students who succeed in college. Flanagan is trying to make a spectacle out of independent schools to, what, make public school parents feel better? To shame private school parents for wanting an excellent education for their children - perhaps even more so given the poor performance of many public school systems during the pandemic?

Is that what you got out of reading this article? No wonder this country is the way it is.

It’s as if you refuse to see the *spirit* of the message.

Hi, Caitlin! Sorry we're not sympathetic to your screed.

You sound pathetic. ew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually agree with the author (whom I know nothing about). Objectively schools, especially those strongly left leaning such as GDS and Sidwell ( and people have said on this board that Holton has swung aggressively in the same direction) are in fact a complete contradiction. They have aggressively embraced what I will describe as hyper-liberalism, and yet charge circa $50,000 per child, per year to attend school. This does not feel like the "equality" they espouse. Can anyone not see the inherent contradiction?

So, would you rather these wealthy schools produce defenders of self-interested, unapologetic, right wing capitalists? What is it that you are proposing? Private schools are not going away.

As a liberal parent who sends my kids to a Big-3, I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of a "private school with a public mission," but I'd much rather have my kids grow up believing that they have responsibilities to people other than themselves rather than the alternative. There is a sense that with this amazing education, you're supposed to go out there and do some good in the world.
And the author presents the worst of these schools, I hope you are aware. The anecdotes aren't made-up, but they are caricatures that are far, far from the typical, nondescript interactions that make up the private school world.

botching like a strong dose of paternalism to complement elitism

What do you propose as the alternative? If you have smart, competent, well-educated kids who want to do some good in the world, what do you suggest they do? Because if these kids don't end up assuming leadership positions, you're going to find a society let by right-wing idiots who don't believe in science.

and the current approach prepares them perfectly to be limousine liberals. Acknowledge the problem, complain about the problem, possibly demand others try to fix the problem, but don't actually use your resources to address the problem and, the most important part, make sure that any fix does not impinge on your own privilege.