Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

I agree with this. Seems to beg the question why more don't. How can you not strive to offer your service to your own employees? I personally found it a selling point when visiting schools and learning that the teachers kids also attended. That tells me they believe in what the school is doing. I could imagine teachers being resentful that they have to teach other people's kids this great curriculum and can't provide it for their own kids. If a school can offer FA to outsiders, why not one of their own? I can't imagine every teacher would even need the assistance because all aren't going to have school aged children at the same time.

Oh but there's an amazing coincidence of teachers moving on once their last child graduates! It really is effectively part of the compensation package.

I can see how this may be true, but I don't think it's a reason to not offer it. Isn't there an ability to make teachers agree to service periods based on the amount of financial aid they receive? My job requires us to sign service agreements when we request expensive training certifications or tuition reimbursement.

That's your professional development reimbursement, not your child's tuition. Schools want to also separate the role of teacher as professional from teacher as parent. It's a murky line but necessary to draw

Anonymous wrote:So are teachers at private schools somehow more deserving of financial aid than someone else of the same economic situation?

Yes of course because we want to attract great teachers and keep them. Having great teachers is such an important part of school.

Anonymous wrote:True for staff, too? I am guessing staff make more than teachers. Begs the questions...what are the going salaries for teachers and staff at privates these days?

Our friends who have 1 parent who is staff at a local private pay 50% tuition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

I agree with this. Seems to beg the question why more don't. How can you not strive to offer your service to your own employees? I personally found it a selling point when visiting schools and learning that the teachers kids also attended. That tells me they believe in what the school is doing. I could imagine teachers being resentful that they have to teach other people's kids this great curriculum and can't provide it for their own kids. If a school can offer FA to outsiders, why not one of their own? I can't imagine every teacher would even need the assistance because all aren't going to have school aged children at the same time.

Oh but there's an amazing coincidence of teachers moving on once their last child graduates! It really is effectively part of the compensation package.

I can see how this may be true, but I don't think it's a reason to not offer it. Isn't there an ability to make teachers agree to service periods based on the amount of financial aid they receive? My job requires us to sign service agreements when we request expensive training certifications or tuition reimbursement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

I agree with this. Seems to beg the question why more don't. How can you not strive to offer your service to your own employees? I personally found it a selling point when visiting schools and learning that the teachers kids also attended. That tells me they believe in what the school is doing. I could imagine teachers being resentful that they have to teach other people's kids this great curriculum and can't provide it for their own kids. If a school can offer FA to outsiders, why not one of their own? I can't imagine every teacher would even need the assistance because all aren't going to have school aged children at the same time.

Oh but there's an amazing coincidence of teachers moving on once their last child graduates! It really is effectively part of the compensation package.

So? It's not an amazing coincidence, it's the need to find better paying employment. The school my children went to had a cadre of long term teachers whose children had attended the school. Their commitment to the school as a long term thriving institution far surpassed most - not all- of the teachers who did not, at some point, have children there. It is not financially advantageous, with rare exception, to work in a private school.

Anonymous wrote:So are teachers at private schools somehow more deserving of financial aid than someone else of the same economic situation?

In a sense, yes, because they are contributing to the school in a valuable way. It's basically non-salaried compensation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

I agree with this. Seems to beg the question why more don't. How can you not strive to offer your service to your own employees? I personally found it a selling point when visiting schools and learning that the teachers kids also attended. That tells me they believe in what the school is doing. I could imagine teachers being resentful that they have to teach other people's kids this great curriculum and can't provide it for their own kids. If a school can offer FA to outsiders, why not one of their own? I can't imagine every teacher would even need the assistance because all aren't going to have school aged children at the same time.

Oh but there's an amazing coincidence of teachers moving on once their last child graduates! It really is effectively part of the compensation package.

Anonymous wrote:Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

I agree with this. Seems to beg the question why more don't. How can you not strive to offer your service to your own employees? I personally found it a selling point when visiting schools and learning that the teachers kids also attended. That tells me they believe in what the school is doing. I could imagine teachers being resentful that they have to teach other people's kids this great curriculum and can't provide it for their own kids. If a school can offer FA to outsiders, why not one of their own? I can't imagine every teacher would even need the assistance because all aren't going to have school aged children at the same time.

Speaking with some experience in this area, it is much easier to be enthusiastically on board with the school's mission and community when your family can be part of it as well. Alternatively, it can be disheartening to be part of providing a much better education to the children in your school than you can provide for your own children. The former is good for the school and the latter is bad.

Anonymous wrote:So are teachers at private schools somehow more deserving of financial aid than someone else of the same economic situation?

If it's a quality teacher then the answer is yes

Anonymous wrote:So are teachers at private schools somehow more deserving of financial aid than someone else of the same economic situation?

No. However, continual teacher turnover costs the schools money. Giving partial FA to a qualified teacher's kid saves the school money in recruitment, rehiring and explaining teacher turnover to parents. If your school makes a poor decision on which teacher's kids they accept, or retaining mediocre teachers, that's a different issue. A teacher's family, with the percentage off for one child still easily pays over $150,000 to a school for say, first through eighth grade. Less for HS only, more for a K-12. If there are 2 kids, the discount often doesn't apply, but the school has retained a good teacher long term, at a salary and benefits far lower (STA being the exception, perhaps) than the same teacher would earn in public school. Again, if your school retains mediocre teachers, that's a separate issue. Two equally deserving qualified kids, the school stands to get a bigger return on investment from the teacher.

So are teachers at private schools somehow more deserving of financial aid than someone else of the same economic situation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like most don't. It seems really crappy that most of these schools wouldn't even let the children of their teachers attend.

It's been my experience that even if a school does not have remission, they will give enough aid to teachers to make it possible for their children to attend-- not to mention admissions priority, which is no small thing.

I know a number of private school teachers with kids in public, including kids who would otherwise be eligible for the school (grade, gender if applicable, caliber of student.

Did they apply to the school? Did they apply for financial aid? Was their aid request turned down?

True for staff, too? I am guessing staff make more than teachers. Begs the questions...what are the going salaries for teachers and staff at privates these days?

Anonymous wrote:It looks like most don't. It seems really crappy that most of these schools wouldn't even let the children of their teachers attend.

Ours only funds a percentage. I find that very disappointing.