Article

the two quotes from the report cited that are probably the most interesting:

"The average private school mean reading score was 14.7 points higher than the average public school reading score"

“After adjusting for selected student characteristics, the difference in means was near zero and not significant.”

Kind of reminds you of the plot behind "Pump Up The Volume."  The principal wanted to raise test scores, so she just secretly got rid of the students who tested poorly.  Private schools pretty much do the same thing, except money is the big motivating factor.  Parents who don't care about education, don't pay to send their kids to private school, so you end up with a school full of motivated kids, so the averages are higher.  The individuals still end up learning the same as the motivated kids whose parents didn't send them to the private school.

Kind of reminds you of the plot behind "Pump Up The Volume."  The principal wanted to raise test scores, so she just secretly got rid of the students who tested poorly.  Private schools pretty much do the same thing, except money is the big motivating factor.  Parents who don't care about education, don't pay to send their kids to private school, so you end up with a school full of motivated kids, so the averages are higher.  The individuals still end up learning the same as the motivated kids whose parents didn't send them to the private school.


The problem in most Public Schools is that you constantly have people trying to use it as a "Sounding Board" for new ideas.  And the quality can vary greatly between differing schools.

To give a great example, look at California Schools.  Back in the mid 1970's, the State Superintendent Of Schools was told about the wonderful results of a new reading system called "phonics".  He then ordered all schools to add it to the ciriculum.

However, the School Boards took his direction a step further, and ordered "Traditional Reading" to be dismissed, and that all students only taught phonics.  The result was for the next 15 years, reading scores dropped.  At the same time, drop-out rates climbed, and SAT scores plumeted (at one point the drop-out rate was almost 50%).  It was not until the mid 1990's that "Traditional Reading" was allowed back into the classroom and the trends started to reverse.  LA Unified School District did not follow this new ruleing until 1997, and it will probably be another 10 years until scores rise significantly in that area of the state.

A lot of parents choose to put their students into Private Schools for various reasons.  Most of them are more disciplined, and have both smaller student-teacher ratios and more time to spend on students with problems.  This is opposed to Public Schools, where most of the time they really do not give a damn about the students (I am talking about the system - not the faculty personally).

Sadly, a lot of public schools today are a joke.  This is especially true in the bigger cities, where the schools and staff are almost at the breaking point.  And this is where you see most of the Private Schools.  Here in Dothan we really only have one Private School, and most people do not see the need to put their children in it (even if they have the money).  Compare that to a place like LA or NYC, where everybody puts their kids in Private Schools if they can.

This is also why states like California have such active "Voucher Proposal" initiatives.  The schools there are a sad joke, and no child should have to suffer through them.  But in Smallville Kansas, you do not have such problems.

I don't think all public schools are bad, but unfortunately I think it's a function of where that school is located sometimes.  New Trier High School in Winnetka, Illinois is consistently rated one of the top public high schools in the country.  My sister's H.S. is one of the top-rated schools in the state of Georgia.  They are always placing in the top 3 in SAT scores for this state.   

Well here is my two cents, granted it is from back in the 1960's and 1970's.

I went to St Titus Catholic School in Aliquippa PA.  Tuition was $11 per year.  Yep an $11 "book fee".  Maximum was $22 per family, so if you had 3 kids in school you paid a total of $22.  (I mention all of this because I mean to say that it was a cheap school accessible to all).

Attendance was open to Catholics and non Catholics alike.  I was not even a member of St Titus Parish.

Our teachers (half of them nuns) made dudely squat for a salary.  Much less than the public school teachers.

Meanwhile across the street and up the hill was Aliquippa High School.. the public school, which had the highest per-student spending in the county.  Dropout rate was 33% and I can attest to you that the public school kids I knew were less articulate and clearly not as smart as my school chums.  How do I know this?  Because I did not read about my chums in the police blotter all the time.  Gotta give them credit though, they put together some kick-ass football and basketball squads at the public school.  Ditka went there. (His Mum was one of our St Titus cafeteria ladies though)

In my Catholic school if a kid acted up he was thrown out of school, not coddled like the public schools did.

If anybody out there seriously thinks that the average private school is just the same quality as the average public school they are deluding themselves.  Are "some" private schools crappy?  No doubt some are.  And there are some fine public schools too.

But sight unseen, "luck of the draw", if I had to choose between attending a public school at random or a private school at random (Catholic or not) I would have to be an idiot to turn down the private school.

Well here is my two cents, granted it is from back in the 1960's and 1970's.

I went to St Titus Catholic School in Aliquippa PA.  Tuition was $11 per year.  Yep an $11 "book fee".  Maximum was $22 per family, so if you had 3 kids in school you paid a total of $22.  (I mention all of this because I mean to say that it was a cheap school accessible to all).

Attendance was open to Catholics and non Catholics alike.  I was not even a member of St Titus Parish.

Our teachers (half of them nuns) made dudely squat for a salary.  Much less than the public school teachers.

Meanwhile across the street and up the hill was Aliquippa High School.. the public school, which had the highest per-student spending in the county.  Dropout rate was 33% and I can attest to you that the public school kids I knew were less articulate and clearly not as smart as my school chums.  How do I know this?  Because I did not read about my chums in the police blotter all the time.  Gotta give them credit though, they put together some kick-ass football and basketball squads at the public school.  Ditka went there. (His Mum was one of our St Titus cafeteria ladies though)

In my Catholic school if a kid acted up he was thrown out of school, not coddled like the public schools did.

If anybody out there seriously thinks that the average private school is just the same quality as the average public school they are deluding themselves.  Are "some" private schools crappy?  No doubt some are.  And there are some fine public schools too.

But sight unseen, "luck of the draw", if I had to choose between attending a public school at random or a private school at random (Catholic or not) I would have to be an idiot to turn down the private school.




I too went to Catholic school and it was the best choice my parents could have made.  The public high schools in the city of Chicago were/are crap, and frankly.....they feared for my safety.

I went to Catholic school when we lived in Cleveland, and I have no doubt in my mind that it was better than the Cleveland City Schools which is probably the worst and most poorly run school system in America. I went to private high school for a couple years, then finished out in the Parma schools here, which aren't great but acceptable I guess. The richer districts have the nicest schools of course.

I don't think all public schools are bad, but unfortunately I think it's a function of where that school is located sometimes.  New Trier High School in Winnetka, Illinois is consistently rated one of the top public high schools in the country.  My sister's H.S. is one of the top-rated schools in the state of Georgia.  They are always placing in the top 3 in SAT scores for this state.   
Naperville's School Districts are the same. 

Private schools usually rank higher simply because, as others have pointed out, the standards are higher.  If a student is not "performing", they can simply kick them out.  A public school doesn't have that option.

Of course, there's always the $$ issue....public schools are dependent on the state and local municipalities to fund them, with the kids (well, their parents) paying a fraction of what it costs to go to a private school.  Since the govt keeps cutting the education budget, class sizes are larger, which DOES affect the teacher's ability to teach effectively.

I'm fortunate that we are in a pretty good school system.  Of course, there are better, but I've been pretty satisfied so far (except this year, but that's not really the quality of education, it's the staff I have a problem with)  If we were still living in our old town (my hometown), there's no way my kids would have been in the public school system there because it SUCKED!

Of course, there's always the $$ issue....public schools are dependent on the state and local municipalities to fund them, with the kids (well, their parents) paying a fraction of what it costs to go to a private school.  Since the govt keeps cutting the education budget, class sizes are larger, which DOES affect the teacher's ability to teach effectively.



Note that in Beaver County Pennsylvania, the school systems with the highest per-student school spending have amongst the lowest overall test score performance (SAT's and standardized tests) and the lowest-funded ones turn out the best results.

That's right... you heard it here.  "School spending" is a red herring.  It is an easy scapegoat to blame the failure of poor teachers, poor parents, and inept administrators.  No amount of money fixes those things.

Today's public schools are boondoggles, loaded with "diversity officers", "multimedia coordinators", "event coordinators", and other wasteful claptrap.  None of it is relevant to teaching Junior how to read or that 2+2=4, or how to find the United States on a world map.

A lot of parents choose to put their students into Private Schools for various reasons.  Most of them are more disciplined, and have both smaller student-teacher ratios and more time to spend on students with problems.  This is opposed to Public Schools, where most of the time they really do not give a damn about the students (I am talking about the system - not the faculty personally).

Sadly, a lot of public schools today are a joke.  This is especially true in the bigger cities, where the schools and staff are almost at the breaking point.  And this is where you see most of the Private Schools.  Here in Dothan we really only have one Private School, and most people do not see the need to put their children in it (even if they have the money).  Compare that to a place like LA or NYC, where everybody puts their kids in Private Schools if they can.

This is also why states like California have such active "Voucher Proposal" initiatives.  The schools there are a sad joke, and no child should have to suffer through them.  But in Smallville Kansas, you do not have such problems.


I can attest to this - both from being in a Private school as well as a Californian.

All through Elementary, I was in a couple different private schools. My parents ended up enrolling me there because I didn't function that well in a regular public school classroom with 30 noisy kids and not much individualized attention from the teachers. The first one I went to from 1st-3rd grade only had like 9 or 10 kids and it ranged from a couple that suffered from seizures to ones like me, who just focused better in that environment. In fact, my best friend as a kid went there too, he was 4 years older than me and was only there because he had mild dyslexia.

There's lots of stories I could tell from this era, but point being, it definitely benefitted me and I think it had some effect on who I am today (i.e. I still tend to prefer long conversations and one on one attention as opposed to being in a party/group atmosphere). By the time I was in Junior High I was cool with being in a public school. Although there were times I'd wished I wasn't. In high school especially, that can be a rough place and my old H.S. was kinda ghetto (although I had my share of friends and it was a relatively decent experience overall).

Note that in Beaver County Pennsylvania, the school systems with the highest per-student school spending have amongst the lowest overall test score performance (SAT's and standardized tests) and the lowest-funded ones turn out the best results.

That's right... you heard it here.  "School spending" is a red herring.  It is an easy scapegoat to blame the failure of poor teachers, poor parents, and inept administrators.  No amount of money fixes those things.

Today's public schools are boondoggles, loaded with "diversity officers", "multimedia coordinators", "event coordinators", and other wasteful claptrap.  None of it is relevant to teaching Junior how to read or that 2+2=4, or how to find the United States on a world map.
Are you talking about state-based funding or local?  If it's strictly state-funding, then that makes sense because the areas with lower tax bases receive more $$.  And, it's been shown that areas with higher poverty have lower test scores, regardless of how much $$ is spent.  Most of the studies that have been done use state-based funding as the "per student expenditure" figure and disregard the local funding altogether.  In Illinois, for example, the school districts that receive the least amount of funding score higher on tests than do the areas that receive larger amounts.  The reason for this is the local funding for the districts is higher.  Naperville, New Trier, and other districts in Illinois that consistently score high on tests have ridiculously high property taxes, with a majority of it going to schools. 

Growing up, I lived in an area with a low tax base and our state funding was crap so our options were limited.  For example, in 4 years of school, I had 4 English classes to choose from.....I think we had 5 science classes, 6 math classes.  Other districts are in similar situations.  Of course students are going to score lower on standardized tests when they haven't even seen a portion of the subject matter being tested on.

That being said, I agree that throwing $$ at schools isn't going to solve the problem, but so many school districts are operating in the red, something has to be done to level the playing field. 

There is one thing that I see and hear about constantly when it comes to the Private-Public school debates.  And it goes along with the "Funding" debates.

In short, look at the schools most of us are talking about.  All of us that lived in large cities seem to have public school horror stories.  And these are frequently the schools that have the largest spending per student.

I went to LA Unified Schools for 6½ years.  The first was from K-4.  This was in the early 1970's, and it was not a bad experience.  From there we moved to Idaho, where the school size and student density was much lower.  In a town of rougly 150k people, there were 3 public high schools, and 1 private high schools.  And all 3 had about the same levels of scholastic ability and attendence-graduation percentages.

However, half way through my Junior year, I moved back to LA.  Was that a shock!  Van Nuys High was 1 of 48 High Schools in the district (the community had a population of around 11.5 million then - 12.9 milllion now with 6 new High Schools, 5 since 2002).  The percentage of students to teachers was roughly double that of Idaho.  I only knew 2 kids that dropped out of my grade in Boise, but I knew at least 20 that dropped out at Van Nuys.  Plus we had a major drug and gang problem which often only made things worse.

I think a lot of parents in big cities try to get their kids in private schools as a way to get more of the "small town feel".  Student density is normally much lower, and classrooms are not as crowded.  And the teachers normally care a lot more about the students.  I know that in LA, they sure don't give a damn.  I skipped over half my senior year, and still graduated.  I think there they only fail you if you get caught selling drugs or killing another student.  That kind of behavior is generally not tolerated in smaller towns.

There is one thing that I see and hear about constantly when it comes to the Private-Public school debates.  And it goes along with the "Funding" debates.

In short, look at the schools most of us are talking about.  All of us that lived in large cities seem to have public school horror stories.  And these are frequently the schools that have the largest spending per student.

I went to LA Unified Schools for 6½ years.  The first was from K-4.  This was in the early 1970's, and it was not a bad experience.  From there we moved to Idaho, where the school size and student density was much lower.  In a town of rougly 150k people, there were 3 public high schools, and 1 private high schools.  And all 3 had about the same levels of scholastic ability and attendence-graduation percentages.

However, half way through my Junior year, I moved back to LA.  Was that a shock!  Van Nuys High was 1 of 48 High Schools in the district (the community had a population of around 11.5 million then - 12.9 milllion now with 6 new High Schools, 5 since 2002).  The percentage of students to teachers was roughly double that of Idaho.  I only knew 2 kids that dropped out of my grade in Boise, but I knew at least 20 that dropped out at Van Nuys.  Plus we had a major drug and gang problem which often only made things worse.

I think a lot of parents in big cities try to get their kids in private schools as a way to get more of the "small town feel".  Student density is normally much lower, and classrooms are not as crowded.  And the teachers normally care a lot more about the students.  I know that in LA, they sure don't give a damn.  I skipped over half my senior year, and still graduated.  I think there they only fail you if you get caught selling drugs or killing another student.  That kind of behavior is generally not tolerated in smaller towns.
Believe it or not, overcrowding is a problem even where I live (total population <8000).  Granted, our school district encompasses all of 4 towns and part of 3, but our town is the largest of the 7.  So, to alleviate the overcrowding at the school my kids went to about 5 minutes away, the kids in our subdivision are now being bussed to a school 20 minutes away.  Quite a few districts in IL are in the same boat.  A majority of our kids are bussed to school.  I think <10% aren't, so some of the "spending per student" moneys are spent on busses (purchase, drivers, maintenance, insurance, gas, etc).  Other schools with similar transportation "issues" are in the same boat.

It's not so much the $$ as the quality of the teachers.

Check this article out and feel a little bit better today :)

The little old lady from Pasadena...well, LA County at least

"When I look back at all the CRAP I learned in high school,
It's a wonder I can think at all...."
--Paul Simon

Most of what they teach in public high school is drivel, and the sick surprise you get in college is you have to hear the same rubbish all over again!

The best teacher I had in high school was Mr. Reynolds.  He tught English.  He was a crusty old conservative yankee who still made you work for an A.  He had a rep as a hardass.  I was nervous as hell when he was handing back that first round of papers and practically sick when he didn't hand me mine back.  He said he wanted to read it to the class.  I thought he was out to really rake me over the coals.  It was a critique of one Faulkner's stories, can't remember which one.  He read it, looked up and said, "I wish I could write as well as Max.  I don't expect this level work from everybody else, don't worry."  I blushed.  Then I thought, "Oh, this guy's not all that tough."  So I breezed through the next assignment, halving the effort.  Reynolds passed the paper back to me with a big red "C" on it.  Didn't bat an eye.  He knew what he expected from ME...and I'd better produce it!  The old prick rode my azz the whole semester.
;D

Anyway, not to go off on sentimental stories from the '80s!  That anectdote just illustrates something I have believed for a long time.  A lot of the social liberalism in public education does not work.  Right-wingers like to blame the "teachers unions."  I don't think organized labor is the problem.  Lack of civility and lack of respect for authority is the problem.  This is not incongruent with my belief in questioning authority.  In order to question authority effectively, you have to know WTF authority is.  My generation, Gen-X, lost sight of this because our parents threw the baby out with the bathwater.  I don't object to "authority."  I object to "authoritarianism."  Reynolds was "authority."  He was the teacher.  I was the student.  My deference to him was necessary for me to learn.  It ended there.  Mr. Hamel, our vice-principal was "authoritarian."  He was just like Vernon in "The Breakfast Club."  With Hamel it went beyond enforcing the rules of the institution.  Mr. Rozzi, the other vice-principal did the same job with a smile on his face.  He would say, "Well, since you did XYZ, I have to give you a Saturday detention."  It ended there.  Hamel would shame you and berate you.  It was about HIS dominance over YOU.  That's "authoritarianism." 

I wish not just in schools, but in society as a whole, we'd learn the difference, and that includes both people who abuse authority (cops) and people who are oblivious to a need for it (such as many students and teachers nowadays). 

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this post, so bring it on!
;D

The best teacher I had in high school was Mr. Reynolds.  He tught English.


He sure did.  ;) 



I do agree that some students nowadays don't have respect for their teachers, and that leads to a lot of problems.  I was visiting my sister's school a couple of years ago, and one of the kids in her chemistry class told the teacher to eff off.....if I had done that in my H.S., my ass would have been suspended for a week.  The teacher didn't even bother saying anything to the moron. 

He sure did.  ;) 



I do agree that some students nowadays don't have respect for their teachers, and that leads to a lot of problems.  I was visiting my sister's school a couple of years ago, and one of the kids in her chemistry class told the teacher to eff off.....if I had done that in my H.S., my ass would have been suspended for a week.  The teacher didn't even bother saying anything to the moron. 

Yeah, I seem to make tye-o's at just the right times!
:P

If he was a college professor it might not be so bad.  A public school teacher does everybody a disservice--the student, the other students, himself, and the other teachers--if he lets something like that go.  What a wuss!

Yeah, I seem to make tye-o's at just the right times!
:P

If he was a college professor it might not be so bad.  A public school teacher does everybody a disservice--the student, the other students, himself, and the other teachers--if he lets something like that go.  What a wuss!



According to what my sister said, this poor woman has had to deal with students like for a couple years now.  She used to crack down on them, but she got tired of wanting things to change and never seeing anything change.  My sister's school is a good school, and one of the best in the state.....but it has its fair share of malcontents.

According to what my sister said, this poor woman has had to deal with students like for a couple years now.  She used to crack down on them, but she got tired of wanting things to change and never seeing anything change.  My sister's school is a good school, and one of the best in the state.....but it has its fair share of malcontents.


Something you see in college as well, maybe more so:  Teachers don't give bad grades anymore.

The professor has to ask, "Do I want to spend winter break arguing with students, parents, and the ombud's office, or do I want to just give the lazy bums a BC and enjoy my holiday?"

The professor's grade used to be the final word.  It isn't anymore, so why give a low grade when it's like picking a three-against-one fight?

Anyway, no employer has even asked for my grade point average, let alone checked.  Heck, I don't think they even bothered to confirm I graduated...or even went!
:D

Something you see in college as well, maybe more so:  Teachers don't give bad grades anymore.

The professor has to ask, "Do I want to spend winter break arguing with students, parents, and the ombud's office, or do I want to just give the lazy bums a BC and enjoy my holiday?"

The professor's grade used to be the final word.  It isn't anymore, so why give a low grade when it's like picking a three-against-one fight?

Anyway, no employer has even asked for my grade point average, let alone checked.  Heck, I don't think they even bothered to confirm I graduated...or even went!
:D




My teachers gave out plenty of bad grades.  I should know, I got a few.  I don't know what school YOU went to, where no one got bad grades because teachers were lazy and couldn't be bothered.....but my school failed students.  A couple of my friends had to graduate a couple semesters later than they wanted to because they failed core classes they absolutely had to pass to get their degree. 

*I* failed students.

*I* failed students.



And I bet you enjoyed every minute of it.  ;)

And I bet you enjoyed every minute of it.  ;)


Little f**kers deserved it.  I told the parents that if they wanted their kids' grades to improve that they should start doing their damned homework instead of begging me for extra credit that I told them would not be assigned at the beginning of the school year when they signed the class policy form that they obviously didn't read.

The "no one gives bad grades anymore" is hyperbole, of course.  It's more acurate to say that in many schools its harder to get bad grades because they scale the test scores and so forth.  I also did know professors who padded bad grades 'coz they didn't want to get bitched at.  In the old days they could say, "Oh yeah?  Well, that's tough!"  Not so easy to do that anymore.  This is more prevalent at elite schools.  Back in the 1950s, Teddy Kennedy got kicked out of Harvard for cheating on his Spanish final.  Wouldn't happen today.  He'd get a second chance!
::)