Yes, I think private schools are immoral to a certain extent (and I speak as someone who went to private high school). Collective resources should go into helping to ensure quality education is accessible for everyone, rather than further stratifying society by perpetuating educational (and, therefore, social) enclaves for those who can afford it (and those with the know-how to apply to the schools and get FA).

I loved my high school, but if destroying it meant redistributing the school's endowment to make meaningful improvements to education across the country, I'd vote for shutting it down.

That said, public education in this country is, sadly, deteriorating. The federal government isn't putting the money into it that's necessary, and it's completely bogged down by overenrollment in the better school districts, and too much standardized testing across the board.

That's why DH and I are considering private school for our daughter. However, if we make that choice, we will make it abundantly clear to her that she is expected to use her education to pursue a career that makes the world a better place. That's the only way I know of to justify a private school education. It's the "from whom much is given, much is expected" mentality.

Anonymous wrote:OP back for more fun

This is how you can tell a school is good

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/05/upshot/a-better-way-to-compare-public-schools.html

I live on capitol hill in DC which is kind of ground zero for the original article

Check out the Stuart Hobson Thread

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/684466.page

Wish I could get everyone commenting together and we could workout this whole issue in DC a lot better than the so called "experts"

At least on capitol hill if everyone just stayed inbound the whole school "situation" would fix itself

The problem is not all of Capitol hill is allowed to attend Stuart Hobson. Brent zoned go to Jefferson, Maury to Elliot Hines -- if there were just one, then sure. But we don't have that. So-- off we go to charters for middle (not the end of the world actually--I think it's heathy for CH kids to mingle with kids from all over the city.)

If you think the children with parents that are too stupid and lazy to properly raise them will benefit you are wrong. You will still have the same under performing element at the school. Good parenting and support is what children need to thrive in school and life. The overall test scores for the school will go up but there will be no gain for the existing low performers. The reason kids in private school and charter schools do well is that they have parents that care and make sacrifices for their children.

Yes, period. The pubic schools thrive only if we send the best there and everyone must help in this endeaver

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes i agree. I have no problem with you sending your kids to private or charter; what I do have a problem with is you calling yourself a liberal or progressive while you avoid your neighborhood school. I read your FB posts full of indignation at stricter immigration rules enforcement, while I know you are going at great lengths to avoid the illegal immigrant kids at your local school.

Think of this - if I’m zoned for a better school (say a rating >5) and I send my kid to private school, do you know what I’ve just done? I’ve opened up a spot at one of the better public schools for an OOB kid. That makes me a better progressive than if I fled to the burbs to an all-white school district.

That's an interesting difference compared to Maryland. OOB kids aren't allowed here. So when you leave and take your high-achieving kid and wealth with you, you slightly decrease the school's scores and PTA effectiveness and you slightly increase its % of FARMS and ESOL, making it less attractive to other middle class families in the future. It's obviously your own business, but that's the kind of spiral we see in my area and it does tick some parents off. It makes "bad school" a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, for everyone but the liberal elite.
Why do you think liberals are School against school vouchers? They don’t want more competition at their private schools....

Not true. The problem with school vouchers are that often the schools don't take special ed, poor kids, or provide transportation which is very much needed among the poor and disabled.

School vouchers tend to lead to further deterioration of the public schools. DC is currently getting more buy in from MC and UMC families than it has since before I was paying attention. Vouchers would totally reverse that progress. New privates would pop up to take the vouchers, and they wouldn’t necessarily offer what the established privates currently do. We’d just be shifting resources in a way that would benefit a few kids who didn’t need the help anyway and enriching some school companies, all at the expense of the overall improvement to the public schools.

Anonymous wrote:Yes i agree. I have no problem with you sending your kids to private or charter; what I do have a problem with is you calling yourself a liberal or progressive while you avoid your neighborhood school. I read your FB posts full of indignation at stricter immigration rules enforcement, while I know you are going at great lengths to avoid the illegal immigrant kids at your local school.

Think of this - if I’m zoned for a better school (say a rating >5) and I send my kid to private school, do you know what I’ve just done? I’ve opened up a spot at one of the better public schools for an OOB kid. That makes me a better progressive than if I fled to the burbs to an all-white school district.

We choose private for our kids mainly for religious reasons. We want our kids to have exposure to religious education. I don't consider this immoral in any sense of the word. And, no, Sunday school will not cut it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is immoral?

Voting to keep illegal immigration a huge problem for poorer districts but seek to either buy in the expensive neighborhoods or pay to avoid brown children.

Hypocritical and immoral.

They love and value diversity! They just don't want junior sitting next to diversity in the classroom.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, for everyone but the liberal elite.
Why do you think liberals are School against school vouchers? They don’t want more competition at their private schools....

Not true. The problem with school vouchers are that often the schools don't take special ed, poor kids, or provide transportation which is very much needed among the poor and disabled.

Anonymous wrote:What is immoral?

Voting to keep illegal immigration a huge problem for poorer districts but seek to either buy in the expensive neighborhoods or pay to avoid brown children.

Hypocritical and immoral.

Yes, for everyone but the liberal elite.
Why do you think liberals are School against school vouchers? They don’t want more competition at their private schools....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People have different reasons for choosing private schools. Not sure you can lump everyone who chooses private school together. But around here, more people are choosing public school districts to segregate themselves.

True that people do segregate in public school as well as private. However every private school in the area is a form of segregation.

Using private schools is a way of segregating but it's not always for immoral reasons.

What is immoral?

Anonymous wrote:no, you are wrong. You can continue to throw money away with these failed schools and it wont matter. If everyone supported their own child the way the previous poster does we would not have a problem. The problem is that too many parents are too lazy and ignorant to properly raise their children.

Nearly 3,000 of these children do not have parents.