Anonymous wrote:I believe in educational elitism and the publics just don't offer that. Everyone is a number and no one knows your name.

Generalize much? Good lord.

I believe in educational elitism and the publics just don't offer that. Everyone is a number and no one knows your name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Privates are an absolute luxury and most people simply can't afford them. So there is no use in making the majority of the population feel bad. We limited ourselves to having one child so we could afford private.

My sons are best friends and spend every moment together they can. They will always have each other. I'm floored that you think private school is more important than a sibling relationship.

I honestly don't see how private school is so beneficial that you would forgo having another child so that you could send your only there.

Pretty sure only one person is saying that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Privates are an absolute luxury and most people simply can't afford them. So there is no use in making the majority of the population feel bad. We limited ourselves to having one child so we could afford private.

My sons are best friends and spend every moment together they can. They will always have each other. I'm floored that you think private school is more important than a sibling relationship.

My sister and I have never been close and never will be. Just because your kids are close now doesn't mean they will be forever and it doesn't mean that siblings in every family are close. I had one kid for many reasons, my poor relationship with my sister being one of them. As it happens, having one kid has made private school education possible and my kid's private school education has been glorious -- far more valuable and rewarding than my relationship with my sister.

This argument is so ridiculous. When people are deciding to have children, there's no way to know whether special circumstances will create a need for smaller class size or whether siblings will be close.

I'm of the mind that I would never sacrifice completing my family (which FOR ME was having a second child, I realize it's possible to feel complete with one child, or none, of five) because I feel that strongly about sending my child to private school. Insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We paid for private (preK-12; earned income, no FA or grandparental contribution) and I'd be happy if DC became a teacher or an EMT. We never saw private school as an income-maximization strategy. Wanted DC to get a great, well-rounded education and come out of it with enough curiosity about the world to last her a lifetime. That's what I got out of my education (which wasn't private until college) and I'm so grateful to my parents for setting me on that path.

How is private school going to make her more curious about the world than public? Curiosity seems like an inborn trait and are you really suggesting that people who attended public school are just mindless drones?

I think curiosity is inborn but lots of times schooling snuffs it out. Obviously, since I went to public schools myself and was happy with my education in this respect, I don't think that sending kids to public school turns them into mindless drones. What I did think was that a particular private school my DC was accepted to was more likely to sustain her curiosity and broaden her interests than DC's public school alternatives would have been. A big part of the equation for me was the teachers -- almost all of whom were lifelong learner types themselves and who didn't seem to be suffering from the burnout that affects many experienced public school teachers. Add to this the fact that our local school district has been in crisis and the leader brought in to reform it had a contemptuous attitude toward teachers. Ironically, a change in the private school's leadership has subsequently changed its culture and not for the better. If I were making the same decision today, I suspect I'd choose private for K-8 and send DC to public (perhaps in a neighboring district) for HS. Again, I really think these should be decisions between concrete alternatives -- school X vs. school Y -- rather than more categorical or ideologically driven (public vs. private).

So the point of my response wasn't that private is better than public (a position I've argued against elsewhere in this thread). It was that there are reasons other than return-on-investment or an economic calculation than can motivate parents to choose a private school. Our reasons were educational. (Curriculum was the other -- we wanted science and foreign language done earlier and well, and wanted arts to be taken seriously and required during HS).

Anonymous wrote:@16:01 sometimes parents who send their kids to public stem schools or vocational school are cutting off their kids true interest. I really don't see how sending a kid to private school is more limiting for a child then any other form of education.
Sometimes parents who send their kids to public schools and universities are doing so with the intent of limiting their kids options to exactly those afforded the parent. If it was good enough for me, it is good enough for them.... Those parents are not focusing on what would be the best school for their kid. Maybe the kids needs public, maybe the kids needs private private but we can all be sure that the kid does not need " if it was good enough for me its good enough for my kid."

How does any parent really know what their kid needs until after the fact?

Anonymous wrote:We paid for private (preK-12; earned income, no FA or grandparental contribution) and I'd be happy if DC became a teacher or an EMT. We never saw private school as an income-maximization strategy. Wanted DC to get a great, well-rounded education and come out of it with enough curiosity about the world to last her a lifetime. That's what I got out of my education (which wasn't private until college) and I'm so grateful to my parents for setting me on that path.

How is private school going to make her more curious about the world than public? Curiosity seems like an inborn trait and are you really suggesting that people who attended public school are just mindless drones?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Privates are an absolute luxury and most people simply can't afford them. So there is no use in making the majority of the population feel bad. We limited ourselves to having one child so we could afford private.

My sons are best friends and spend every moment together they can. They will always have each other. I'm floored that you think private school is more important than a sibling relationship.

I honestly don't see how private school is so beneficial that you would forgo having another child so that you could send your only there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My public school in the midwest graduated three of the top surgeons. One of the top doctors in town, refused to send his three boys to any private or independent school, they were too bright. His daughter, who died last year, was not so bright - she went to a private school. The sons became all top rated surgeons.

Ok, but what are the other public school classmates doing? The best and brightest will succeed no matter where they are, but it's those that are average is what concerns me as a parent. Of course every parent thinks their junior is gifted and bright, but in reality not everyone is and the competition due to the sheer number of students is intense. I've heard of even the most motivated parent and child getting burned out from public and run to private as fast as they can, but for those that are average, it's a gamble. You can either end up loving school and learning or hate it due to the environment in which if you're not a jock or nerd, you're just set up for being mediocre. I'd rather have my possibly average public school kid be something a bit more at private if not for a better chance at life then at least for the sake of enjoying the school experience, not feeling like just another body moving from class to class.

And btw, all these Midwest people need to stop comparing their Midwest upbringing and experiences to the DMV. Here there are a handful of kick ass public schools with the rest just ranging from average to horrible so many parents don't have a choice in sending kids to private.

So if average public school students need to move to private to become "a bit more", what hope is there for average private school students?

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the most reasonable posts I have read on DCUM. You've hit the nail on the head. Many Americans seem to have that ... "if it was good enough for me" mentality and "this is how we did it when I was a kid". Sad. Mediocrity is safe.

Anonymous wrote:@16:01 sometimes parents who send their kids to public stem schools or vocational school are cutting off their kids true interest. I really don't see how sending a kid to private school is more limiting for a child then any other form of education.
Sometimes parents who send their kids to public schools and universities are doing so with the intent of limiting their kids options to exactly those afforded the parent. If it was good enough for me, it is good enough for them.... Those parents are not focusing on what would be the best school for their kid. Maybe the kids needs public, maybe the kids needs private private but we can all be sure that the kid does not need " if it was good enough for me its good enough for my kid."

Except many of us are doing the opposite.

This is one of the most reasonable posts I have read on DCUM. You've hit the nail on the head. Many Americans seem to have that ... "if it was good enough for me" mentality and "this is how we did it when I was a kid". Sad. Mediocrity is safe.

Anonymous wrote:@16:01 sometimes parents who send their kids to public stem schools or vocational school are cutting off their kids true interest. I really don't see how sending a kid to private school is more limiting for a child then any other form of education.
Sometimes parents who send their kids to public schools and universities are doing so with the intent of limiting their kids options to exactly those afforded the parent. If it was good enough for me, it is good enough for them.... Those parents are not focusing on what would be the best school for their kid. Maybe the kids needs public, maybe the kids needs private private but we can all be sure that the kid does not need " if it was good enough for me its good enough for my kid."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Privates are an absolute luxury and most people simply can't afford them. So there is no use in making the majority of the population feel bad. We limited ourselves to having one child so we could afford private.

My sons are best friends and spend every moment together they can. They will always have each other. I'm floored that you think private school is more important than a sibling relationship.

I don't see anything wrong with considering what you want for your child as a factor in limiting the number of children a person decides to have. If PP were a "poor" who decided to have two kids instead of just one knowing that it would mean having zero savings for college or retirement, what would you say?

Please tell me you are a non-native English speaker and that's why you don't realize how offensive this sounds.

You haven't been on DCUM much, have you? It's DCUM tongue in cheek lingo for those of us who do plebeian things like shop at Target.

+1 untwist the panties people. DCUM is quite famous for castigating people for having more kids than they can afford so original PP doesn't need to defend this decision to anyone. And sibling relationships don't necessarily work out so planning to give your child a playmate (whose education you might then not be able to afford) can backfire big time.

We're all shocked that you don't find your postings offensive.

I don't think that there's anything offensive about not leaping to the conclusion that someone has a really vile attitude toward other people when there's another alternative -- that that person writes in a way that indicates s/he doesn't understand a linguistic nuance in English (which may not have the same connotations in other languages).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Privates are an absolute luxury and most people simply can't afford them. So there is no use in making the majority of the population feel bad. We limited ourselves to having one child so we could afford private.

My sons are best friends and spend every moment together they can. They will always have each other. I'm floored that you think private school is more important than a sibling relationship.

I don't see anything wrong with considering what you want for your child as a factor in limiting the number of children a person decides to have. If PP were a "poor" who decided to have two kids instead of just one knowing that it would mean having zero savings for college or retirement, what would you say?

Please tell me you are a non-native English speaker and that's why you don't realize how offensive this sounds.

Same to you.