Anonymous wrote:
During undergrad, I met a lot of kids who went to private schools for k-12. My impression of them was that they didn't come from a "culture of achievement" but rather they came from a "culture of privilege." Most of them lacked perspective and weren't capable of empathy.

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes I think that "culture of achievement" referred to really is just helicopter parenting..making sure Billy always has someone right by his side making sure things go well. Grades slip..here is a tutor. Like French? Let's go to France this summer. Raise your hand in your tiny class, instant attention. I am not sure this creates a self sufficient, self inspired individual. There are many parts to an education and self sufficiency is a huge one.

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to a private school in a very wealthy area. As they get older, I realize that I'm not paying for superior teachers or education. As an example, my DD fell quite a few percent on a standardized test from the beginning of the school year to the end. So we bring out the tutors/special classes to bring them up just as all of my friends would do. Our school has very high test scores but people would be deluding themselves if they think the school is the cause of the high test scores. It is correlation(population who values education versus this great machine of teachers who imparts wisdom on the kids).

So why do it? Peers have a large influence on children ( actually I think for all people). I want my daughter surrounded by like minded families. Yes, there are also the showy snobs but we would never be accepted in those circles anyway. These kids are more likely to flame out. So the kids remaining are more likely than her peers at public to come from families that value education. In public, she could find those peers but she could have just as easily found friends who don't value education. So I think the advantage that I give my daughter is that I increase the probability that she will be successful by putting her in a group that has a higher percentage of high achieving kids from where she can select her friends. I don't care about race, I am looking to buy into a culture of achievement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with people here that it's about honesty. People need to admit that either 1) they think it's more important for their kids to do to high-performing schools than diverse schools, and they need to own that decision; or 2) they think it's more important for their kids to go to school with all kinds of people than go to a high-performing school, and they need to own that decision. Nobody gets a free pass to say one thing and do another. These are real trade-offs, and people need to be honest enough to admit when they are making them.

Also, I agree that people need to stop bashing schools their children do not attend. Anonymous uninformed advice on this board (and the snowball effect it creates) does affect people's housing and schooling choices.

There is another option though. I believe it is equally important to send my kids to a high-performing school and to have relationships (not go to school) with all kinds of people. For me personally, it is easier for a school to educated my kids at a high level and for me to ensure they have relationships with all kinds of people.

So my kids live in a diverse neighborhood but go to a private school. Also, they are in diverse activities on the weekend/after school.

Also, I would like to add that the 30/30/30 diversity is not diverse in my book. Those 30's need to be broken down. White/Black/Hispanic - can we really be more shallow.

Actually, I think it's worse to teach your kids that they can be around and make friends with people of different backgrounds but not actually attend school with them. Doesn't that further elitism, bigotry, et cetera? Kids aren't stupid. They pick up on that kind of thing, like, oh, you be polite to poor people and say "hi" to them on the street, but don't attend school with them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with people here that it's about honesty. People need to admit that either 1) they think it's more important for their kids to do to high-performing schools than diverse schools, and they need to own that decision; or 2) they think it's more important for their kids to go to school with all kinds of people than go to a high-performing school, and they need to own that decision. Nobody gets a free pass to say one thing and do another. These are real trade-offs, and people need to be honest enough to admit when they are making them.

Also, I agree that people need to stop bashing schools their children do not attend. Anonymous uninformed advice on this board (and the snowball effect it creates) does affect people's housing and schooling choices.

There is another option though. I believe it is equally important to send my kids to a high-performing school and to have relationships (not go to school) with all kinds of people. For me personally, it is easier for a school to educated my kids at a high level and for me to ensure they have relationships with all kinds of people.

So my kids live in a diverse neighborhood but go to a private school. Also, they are in diverse activities on the weekend/after school.

Also, I would like to add that the 30/30/30 diversity is not diverse in my book. Those 30's need to be broken down. White/Black/Hispanic - can we really be more shallow.

Anonymous wrote:My kids go to a private school in a very wealthy area. As they get older, I realize that I'm not paying for superior teachers or education. As an example, my DD fell quite a few percent on a standardized test from the beginning of the school year to the end. So we bring out the tutors/special classes to bring them up just as all of my friends would do. Our school has very high test scores but people would be deluding themselves if they think the school is the cause of the high test scores. It is correlation(population who values education versus this great machine of teachers who imparts wisdom on the kids).

So why do it? Peers have a large influence on children ( actually I think for all people). I want my daughter surrounded by like minded families. Yes, there are also the showy snobs but we would never be accepted in those circles anyway. These kids are more likely to flame out. So the kids remaining are more likely than her peers at public to come from families that value education. In public, she could find those peers but she could have just as easily found friends who don't value education. So I think the advantage that I give my daughter is that I increase the probability that she will be successful by putting her in a group that has a higher percentage of high achieving kids from where she can select her friends. I don't care about race, I am looking to buy into a culture of achievement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Why would people so intensely further PG's reputation when they don't even have any experience with PG?

Because people have racist beliefs.

I think it's because people have racist beliefs and they want to seem right. They want a predominantly AA county to seem like a failure because it proves out their racist beliefs, so they can somehow justify them.

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think the private schools prepare kids to be leaders rather than workers. My husband and I both went to public and we both agree that we were taught to be workers compared to my daughter who is being trained to be a leader lots of project/ presentations etc. I'm sure the HGC is similiar.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think the private schools prepare kids to be leaders rather than workers. My husband and I both went to public and we both agree that we were taught to be workers compared to my daughter who is being trained to be a leader lots of project/ presentations etc. I'm sure the HGC is similiar.

All public schools are the same... They did not teach u that in private school?

Ok I should have added the "elite" publics to this mix. People in this area pay insane amounts more to live in school clusters that are less economically diverse for many of the same reasons. Unlike private parents, they can someday recoup some of the premium when they sell their house assuming that their school district didn't engage in some crappy social engineering program which ruined their public school. I think in most of the area, any kid who applies him/ herself can get a good education. The hurdle is just higher for some kids than others based on a lot of factors ( peer influences, bullying, safety, overall preparation of the class..as it will determine the level that the teacher teaches too, etc).

MCPS can create a lot of mediocre schools through social engineering but if they strong arm the top publics' for this endeavor people are just going to send their kids to private. 200k premium in housing price plus extra taxes goes a long way towards tuition.