NP - I'm not sure how you don't recognize public for the issues it has. I say this as someone with deep friendships with public school teachers who suggest the same. It's maybe something you're comfortable with doing for your kid in to public but I'm going to suggest that it makes perfect sense for families to consider pvt much more frequently moving forward. Look at the world we live in - unless you are going to the top public, it's often easy to desire considering at min, pvt. it just is. Between social and academic probs, going pvt resolves much of those issues.

Pvt is not the cure all of course - the right fit ultimately is the solution but much too often - public isn't unless it's one if the best publics. I would suggest even then, you still should look at fit, cultural and academic. Some kids can thrive no matter where they are but a lot of kids do better when there are choices.

Anonymous wrote:Public school has severely deteriorated due to the influx of low-income foreigners and changes in discipline policies.

People who value education and better environments for their children are opting for private. Simple as.

Yes, because people who can’t afford private education cannot possibly value education and better environments for their children.

The walls of your bubble are thick.

Anonymous wrote:By next year people will be pulling kids they won’t have jobs to pay for private school

Maga economics

Jokes on them. They will still have to pay unless they buy the tuition insurance.

Two of my kids attended private school for all or part of their pre-HS years. Both on partial scholarships. For DD, the biggest part of the monthly bill was the tuition insurance that all scholarship students were required to have if you didn’t pay your share off before 9/1.

Anonymous wrote:^^ maybe but at least it's true!

Shhhhh !

You must realize that there are many true things you aren’t allowed to say. Political correctness is still with us.

This reminds me of the “Emporer’s New Clothes” fable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Public schools are atrocious. A very destructive force in America. Even the good ones in affluent areas have gotten far, far worse over the past few decades. And the merely above average ones? They turn out kids who can barely read or write.

Far more kids who get into MIT, Stanford, Harvard, etc went to public high schools, not private high schools. So, not sure what you are saying about public schools being atrocious is correct, unless you are a bigot or a xenophobe. And how is public education for children a destructive force? Send them to coal mines instead?

This isn’t very smart. How many kids go to public? How many to private? You have to do a weighted percentage to have it make sense. I bet it’s a much larger share of private school kids got to top untiversities

Betting is not very smart. And misspelling “universities” is … funny and speaks for itself. If you lined up only the top private and only the top public schools, more go to Harvard from public high schools, for instance. This data is public. Boston Latin, Stuyvesant, etc; Harvard Westlake, Andover, etc.

That’s really not fair to compare top private and top public schools. Kids at schools like Stuyvesant and Thomas Jefferson etc score 1500+ average on the SAT, whereas the top privates are 1400s, even they are even submitting their scores or paying someone else to take the test. And the public school kids’ parents are mostly likely not giving fat donations to top universities or using legacy admits. Merit versus money. Too many differences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Public schools are atrocious. A very destructive force in America. Even the good ones in affluent areas have gotten far, far worse over the past few decades. And the merely above average ones? They turn out kids who can barely read or write.

Far more kids who get into MIT, Stanford, Harvard, etc went to public high schools, not private high schools. So, not sure what you are saying about public schools being atrocious is correct, unless you are a bigot or a xenophobe. And how is public education for children a destructive force? Send them to coal mines instead?

This isn’t very smart. How many kids go to public? How many to private? You have to do a weighted percentage to have it make sense. I bet it’s a much larger share of private school kids got to top untiversities

Betting is not very smart. And misspelling “universities” is … funny and speaks for itself. If you lined up only the top private and only the top public schools, more go to Harvard from public high schools, for instance. This data is public. Boston Latin, Stuyvesant, etc; Harvard Westlake, Andover, etc.

^^ maybe but at least it's true!

Anonymous wrote:Public school has severely deteriorated due to the influx of low-income foreigners and changes in discipline policies.

People who value education and better environments for their children are opting for private. Simple as.

MAGA!

Public school has severely deteriorated due to the influx of low-income foreigners and changes in discipline policies.

People who value education and better environments for their children are opting for private. Simple as.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Public schools are atrocious. A very destructive force in America. Even the good ones in affluent areas have gotten far, far worse over the past few decades. And the merely above average ones? They turn out kids who can barely read or write.

Far more kids who get into MIT, Stanford, Harvard, etc went to public high schools, not private high schools. So, not sure what you are saying about public schools being atrocious is correct, unless you are a bigot or a xenophobe. And how is public education for children a destructive force? Send them to coal mines instead?

This isn’t very smart. How many kids go to public? How many to private? You have to do a weighted percentage to have it make sense. I bet it’s a much larger share of private school kids got to top untiversities

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so weird when some people make a big deal about Catholic schools not being “private” schools.

Fwiw, I’m a 50 something parent of kids in catholic schools in the dc area, and I attended catholic schools k through 12 in the dc area.

I’ve heard all sorts of weird statements on this topic.

- People who think “private” schools are dramatically different/better/more prestigious than catholic schools, so you cannot lump them together.

- People who think Catholic schools are so unique that you should always use that term rather than the genetic private term.

It’s dumb. Use whatever term you like; both are correct. And anyone who takes issue with such things should ask themselves why.

What about non-Catholic Christian schools? Most people say they send their kids to a Christian school or X Episcopal School, or a "religious private". They don't just say my kid goes to private school.

DC is at an Episcopalian school with “saint” in the name, and I always say generically “private school.” The only time I ever specify that it is Episcopalian is if that fact is relevant or necessary in the conversation — most often after I’ve said the name, to correct people who assume it’s Catholic because they somehow think all “Saint So and So” schools are Catholic.