If you are wealthy would you send your kids to a W school over private?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whitman, Niche diversity: B+

Holton, Niche diversity: A

Oh no not Niche. They will find a reason to claim it's false...just like they claim that there is no overall HS ranking that combines public schools and private schools.

Oh wait look! I just checked, and here is the high school ranking on Niche. A google search brings you to these links and the title of the lists are clear: Best High Schools in Maryland, Best Public High Schools in Maryland, and Best Private Schools in Maryland.

Bottom line, the three top W schools are in 8th, 13th, and 18th place for Best HS in Maryland. I know someone doesn't believe that this list is legit, but there you have it in black and white:

Overall Best High Schools in Maryland:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-high-schools/s/maryland/



And here is public schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-public-high-schools/s/maryland/



And finally private schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-private-high-schools/s/maryland/

I'm sooo shocked that a school that can determine who goes there has higher test scores, and they don't have to serve kids with SN if they don't want to. Quick, call WaPo.

But wait — I thought private schools are mediocre and rich people send their kids there due to status. Now it’s obvious they have higher test scores?

Pick your argument.

you're a bit slow. They have highers stats compared to most publics, even W schools, because they can pick and choose who they let in. The student has to take and pass a test to get in, so they aren't dealing with lots of kids with SN issues.

Wealthy parents will get their kids tutored to make sure they pass the test.

So they have higher stats but offer a less advanced education?

I'm sure they offer advanced education, but many now don't offer AP classes now (which I'm hearing private school parents lamenting about), and you aren't going to have large number of kids taking the very advanced math tracks. Some years you may have only a handful of students needing the very advanced math track. It would be school dependent, obviously, but W schools have a lot of high achieving kids, so no shortage of kids needing the very advanced math track.

SAT Math goes up to maybe precalc? I think it's actually Alg 2 from what my DC told me. So, SAT math scores aren't a good measure of what advanced math track private schools offer.

And like I said, private schools can pick and choose whom they want to admit, and they make the students take an entrance exam. So yea, of course their stats are going to be collectively higher than even a W school that cannot pick and choose their student body.

AND......as other PPs have stated; its not only about academic rigor. There's much more to success and happiness...even college placement than academic performance.

Certainly, there are various reasons why sending a child to a private school may make sense, but I don't think that ^^PP list from niche means much in terms of comparing advanced course offerings between W school and private schools, and which schools have more advanced students.

Agree. Niche is not a good or even mediocre place to get info. Anyone who posts from there has a long way to go on the learning curve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Damn you, Poe's Law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

I enjoyed that book too, but I had a different take away from it. I too am big fan of capitalism. And I also know my numbers - stats and economics, which drive me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

Ah yes, have you actually read it? All of it? Since you're a fan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

I enjoyed that book too, but I had a different take away from it. I too am big fan of capitalism. And I also know my numbers - stats and economics, which drive me.

By helping yourself you help society.
The butcher the brewer and the baker provide you with your dinner not because of their benevolence, but their self interest.
There is no greater motivator than self interest.

So get wealthy within the law, and in the process you will help society, pay taxes and create jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

I enjoyed that book too, but I had a different take away from it. I too am big fan of capitalism. And I also know my numbers - stats and economics, which drive me.

By helping yourself you help society.
The butcher the brewer and the baker provide you with your dinner not because of their benevolence, but their self interest.
There is no greater motivator than self interest.

So get wealthy within the law, and in the process you will help society, pay taxes and create jobs.

It's the Adam Smith equivalent of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" sentence. Apparently the only thing they ever said in their whole entire lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

I enjoyed that book too, but I had a different take away from it. I too am big fan of capitalism. And I also know my numbers - stats and economics, which drive me.

By helping yourself you help society.
The butcher the brewer and the baker provide you with your dinner not because of their benevolence, but their self interest.
There is no greater motivator than self interest.

So get wealthy within the law, and in the process you will help society, pay taxes and create jobs.

It's the Adam Smith equivalent of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" sentence. Apparently the only thing they ever said in their whole entire lives.

He spoke about the benefits of factor endowments, the dangers of guilds, benefits of trade, need for limited government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

+1
All these Feds working in the area are highly educated and smart, yet make no money.
It takes a lot more than education to be wealthy. The wealthy know that.

Lol at “no money”….. you must live in a bubble.

Making 200K a year each is nothing by my standards. Aim higher

DP
I use statistics, similar to what the government does. I think 2 educated working feds are squarely UMC. When one uses stats as cutoffs it doesn't really matter what others "think", because there are defined boundaries.

Perhaps top 1% of net worth for the DC area should be considered. That's over 20 million.

Happy slicing:
https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
Or
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

Also many calculators to slice by age, gender, and other demographics.

Upper class is usually defined above 5% or 2.5%, depending on which economist is publishing. Only looking at the top 1% is really myopic. But hey, do what you want and let others do the same. I trust the professionals in this field and normally go with 2.5 or 5 depending on the point I'm trying to make. Top 2.5% in DC is closer to NW of 7M and HHI of 650k.

"Wealthy" is usually defined by top quintile which would include dual Fed households in DC - NW 700k, HHI 225k.

So you can have a very narrowly defined group but it doesn't say anything about the population as a whole. Plus, it's not helpful to hurl insults the way some PPs did - not saying you specifically, but some did. It is helpful to define criteria and categorize appropriately.

At my country club a HHI of 1 to 1.5 million is about average. Same with a 7 to 12 million net worth. I get that may be a bubble. But I like that it pushes me to think bigger and achieve more.

Good for you????

I prefer to be in touch with reality and it has served me well. We must be in different clubs. I don't really know anyone with your outlook..... most people at my club see their priviledge and look to improve society, not just themselves. I wish you well with your bazillions.. don't expect to be a successful policy maker... people like me waaaay outnumber you.

Respectfully, I happen to be a fan of capitalism and Adam Smith--think The Wealth of Nations. No apology for that. Best of luck.

I enjoyed that book too, but I had a different take away from it. I too am big fan of capitalism. And I also know my numbers - stats and economics, which drive me.

By helping yourself you help society.
The butcher the brewer and the baker provide you with your dinner not because of their benevolence, but their self interest.
There is no greater motivator than self interest.

So get wealthy within the law, and in the process you will help society, pay taxes and create jobs.

It's the Adam Smith equivalent of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" sentence. Apparently the only thing they ever said in their whole entire lives.

+1

I suggest the PP read the WHOLE book then put it into this conversation context. At this point I'm unsure (s)he will be able to do that. Perhaps because (s)he was publicly educated and just read the cliff's notes for all required reading. In addition the PP was not required to tie in economics, history, and sociology into their English critical thinking essay and contrast different points of view for a unique perspective. Private schools are good at lateral rather than siloed learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a college accept a kid from a school with very few advanced classes?

Legacy
Money
Sports
Special talents.

The same reasons these kids are accepted at private schools

Ah ok. Got it. So none of them are actually any good at teaching kids anything. Rich people just choose mediocrity for their kids.

We don't need anything more academically. The kids get the advantages in the soft skills and colleges rank them higher because of this.

Huh?

There have been so many studies on this, especially since the college admissions scandle. Just Google "private school advantage in college admissions" or something of that nature. The advantage will never go away (unfortunately). The UC are really good at helping and insulating themselves for centuries if not millenia. The categories for college admissions will change with time, but there will always be a way to give slight advantage to already advantaged folks. It's always been that way.

Remember, women began entering the workforce in droves in the 70s and still are represented at 3% in top jobs, have unequal pay in almost every industry, and still take on the lions share of work at home. White men however still have the advantage in every category.

Why do you think public vs private schools is somehow going to magically escape human psychology and be fair?

I'm from the UMC and slightly pierce into UC circles. Of course, I see the advantages and want my kids to have them. I will likely never be UC, but my kids definitely have a chance. And they do have the mannerisms, peer group, and education to support it.

My Father-in-Law grew up poor and is now pretty wealthy. He has been encouraging us to send our kids to private school (especially high school) because in life, it's truly who you know and not what you know that makes a difference. This is how life works for the most part, whether we like it or not.

Exactly. The quality of education sucks. But that doesn’t matter.

Well.... no really.

It's a different type of education. If you want them to learn multi-variable Calculus (or difficult math in public school), I have to question why. I am a scientist and the last time I used it was to pass the AP exam in HS. On the other hand, if you want them to learn soft skills (learned in private schools), the last time I used that was today dealing with some colleagues. So which skills are more relevant? What exactly is an "education" to you?

In Spanish the phrase "mala educación" or "bad education" literally means poor manners. This idea of soft skills/ private school advantage transcends cultural boundaries and time. You can find similar things the world over.

All the top private schools offer BC calc.

Yes, but you clearly missed the point.

No. The point is that this discussion is meaningless because in private schools you can take BC calc and learn soft skills. You don’t actually have to choose.

The point is BC calculus doesn't matter as much as (some) people think it does. So, yeah, you missed the point.

I’m rejecting the premise of this entire discussion.

Ah, I know your type. Lemme guess...

You send your kids to a Big 3 or highly academic private where they excel academically. They set the curve! Your family is of a specific demographic (not white, not under represented). Your kids are socially awkward, and therefore, you are not getting your $45k+ worth. It doesn't really matter to you, because you don't see this point and have a brand label school to brag to your friends. You will wonder why some of the less smart kids from the very same school go ivy or to a top college when your kids end up at a good university but not their top choice.... I've seen his many times....

I can’t make any sense of this incoherent post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whitman, Niche diversity: B+

Holton, Niche diversity: A

Oh no not Niche. They will find a reason to claim it's false...just like they claim that there is no overall HS ranking that combines public schools and private schools.

Oh wait look! I just checked, and here is the high school ranking on Niche. A google search brings you to these links and the title of the lists are clear: Best High Schools in Maryland, Best Public High Schools in Maryland, and Best Private Schools in Maryland.

Bottom line, the three top W schools are in 8th, 13th, and 18th place for Best HS in Maryland. I know someone doesn't believe that this list is legit, but there you have it in black and white:

Overall Best High Schools in Maryland:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-high-schools/s/maryland/



And here is public schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-public-high-schools/s/maryland/



And finally private schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-private-high-schools/s/maryland/

I'm sooo shocked that a school that can determine who goes there has higher test scores, and they don't have to serve kids with SN if they don't want to. Quick, call WaPo.

But wait — I thought private schools are mediocre and rich people send their kids there due to status. Now it’s obvious they have higher test scores?

Pick your argument.

you're a bit slow. They have highers stats compared to most publics, even W schools, because they can pick and choose who they let in. The student has to take and pass a test to get in, so they aren't dealing with lots of kids with SN issues.

Wealthy parents will get their kids tutored to make sure they pass the test.

So they have higher stats but offer a less advanced education?

I'm sure they offer advanced education, but many now don't offer AP classes now (which I'm hearing private school parents lamenting about), and you aren't going to have large number of kids taking the very advanced math tracks. Some years you may have only a handful of students needing the very advanced math track. It would be school dependent, obviously, but W schools have a lot of high achieving kids, so no shortage of kids needing the very advanced math track.

SAT Math goes up to maybe precalc? I think it's actually Alg 2 from what my DC told me. So, SAT math scores aren't a good measure of what advanced math track private schools offer.

And like I said, private schools can pick and choose whom they want to admit, and they make the students take an entrance exam. So yea, of course their stats are going to be collectively higher than even a W school that cannot pick and choose their student body.

AND......as other PPs have stated; its not only about academic rigor. There's much more to success and happiness...even college placement than academic performance.

Certainly, there are various reasons why sending a child to a private school may make sense, but I don't think that ^^PP list from niche means much in terms of comparing advanced course offerings between W school and private schools, and which schools have more advanced students.

Agree. Niche is not a good or even mediocre place to get info. Anyone who posts from there has a long way to go on the learning curve.

So post a better data source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whitman, Niche diversity: B+

Holton, Niche diversity: A

Oh no not Niche. They will find a reason to claim it's false...just like they claim that there is no overall HS ranking that combines public schools and private schools.

Oh wait look! I just checked, and here is the high school ranking on Niche. A google search brings you to these links and the title of the lists are clear: Best High Schools in Maryland, Best Public High Schools in Maryland, and Best Private Schools in Maryland.

Bottom line, the three top W schools are in 8th, 13th, and 18th place for Best HS in Maryland. I know someone doesn't believe that this list is legit, but there you have it in black and white:

Overall Best High Schools in Maryland:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-high-schools/s/maryland/



And here is public schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-public-high-schools/s/maryland/



And finally private schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-private-high-schools/s/maryland/

I'm sooo shocked that a school that can determine who goes there has higher test scores, and they don't have to serve kids with SN if they don't want to. Quick, call WaPo.

But wait — I thought private schools are mediocre and rich people send their kids there due to status. Now it’s obvious they have higher test scores?

Pick your argument.

The don’t have higher test scores, they have less kids to bring down their test scores. In a comparison of similar type kids the test scores are….. similar. Not better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whitman, Niche diversity: B+

Holton, Niche diversity: A

Oh no not Niche. They will find a reason to claim it's false...just like they claim that there is no overall HS ranking that combines public schools and private schools.

Oh wait look! I just checked, and here is the high school ranking on Niche. A google search brings you to these links and the title of the lists are clear: Best High Schools in Maryland, Best Public High Schools in Maryland, and Best Private Schools in Maryland.

Bottom line, the three top W schools are in 8th, 13th, and 18th place for Best HS in Maryland. I know someone doesn't believe that this list is legit, but there you have it in black and white:

Overall Best High Schools in Maryland:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-high-schools/s/maryland/



And here is public schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-public-high-schools/s/maryland/



And finally private schools alone:

https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-private-high-schools/s/maryland/

I'm sooo shocked that a school that can determine who goes there has higher test scores, and they don't have to serve kids with SN if they don't want to. Quick, call WaPo.

But wait — I thought private schools are mediocre and rich people send their kids there due to status. Now it’s obvious they have higher test scores?

Pick your argument.

The don’t have higher test scores, they have less kids to bring down their test scores. In a comparison of similar type kids the test scores are….. similar. Not better.

Standardized test scores don’t provide a complete measure of the quality of education a school provides.