NationStates Jolt Archive

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

In a nutshell: for those of you who tout private school educations as being superior to public school educations, a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

The full report can be read at the link above, and the article excerpt comes from American Educator, Fall 2006 issue, page 6.

Pretty much every study has concluded that.
Two things make a difference in a school's performance:
Socio-economic factors (mainly Parent's wealth)
class size

Yet we still have to put up with the Rightys going on and on about how private is so much better than public.
I read one report recently by a private school educator who said class size has no effect until it's 15:1, and therefore the govt instead of doing this should save money by getting rid of teachers and having a 40:1 student/teacher ratio in public schools.

Pretty much every study has concluded that.
Two things make a difference in a school's performance:
Socio-economic factors (mainly Parent's wealth)
class size

Yet we still have to put up with the Rightys going on and on about how private is so much better than public.
I read one report recently by a private school educator who said class size has no effect until it's 15:1, and therefore the govt instead of doing this should save money by getting rid of teachers and having a 40:1 student/teacher ratio in public schools.I think that as far as class size is concerned, it all depends on the subject. English teachers shoud never have more than 12-15 students in a class at a time, if they're planning to teach writing anyway. Classes that are content based as opposed to process based can deal with a few more students because some of those kids will teach themselves from the book.

That doesn't surprise me one bit. I know quite a few dumbasses who attended a Catholic primary school. Certainly no evidence of any "head start."

yeah ive read that before.

and i believe it

my brotherinlaw sent his kids to private church school until he realized that those schools suck and that the kids dont turn out any better. (meaning they gave it up when their daughters classmates started getting pregnant)

my question is why do we suck compared to the schools of other countries. do you have any thoughts on that?

This really doesnt make me feel any better. That private schools are performing at the same internationaly deplorable rate as public schools- should be no consolation to anyone. It just means now parents really do have no place to turn to escape the drudgery and anti-intellectualism that defines modern American primary and secondary schooling.

In the end though. I prefer to go by "real" test scores instead of balances in socioeconomic factors.

yeah ive read that before.

and i believe it

my brotherinlaw sent his kids to private church school until he realized that those schools suck and that the kids dont turn out any better. (meaning they gave it up when their daughters classmates started getting pregnant)

my question is why do we suck compared to the schools of other countries. do you have any thoughts on that?

Yes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikrYzz1pxwU

It may be comedic, but there is more than a grain of truth in it. ;)

Thank you Kat. This is incredibly helpful, you have no idea.:fluffle:

This really doesnt make me feel any better. That private schools are performing at the same internationaly deplorable rate as public schools- should be no consolation to anyone. It just means now parents really do have no place to turn to escape the drudgery and anti-intellectualism that defines modern American primary and secondary schooling.

In the end though. I prefer to go by "real" test scores instead of balances in socioeconomic factors.

I prefer that people actually do the assignments they are given instead of blaming everyone else, but that's me.

snip


I had suspected this for awhile, but lacked concrete proof. In particular, I noticed that my friends who got jobs teaching in public schools had to meet more rigorous requirements in terms of their qualifications and skills than those who were hired as teachers in private schools.

I personally think I benefited from attending a private school. There was a lot more peer pressure to perform well (I'm not sure if that was just my school though) than there was at the high school my brother attended. Also, there was less bullying, which is always a good thing. :)

I prefer that people actually do the assignments they are given instead of blaming everyone else, but that's me.

It's so true.

Many kids in my school complain about how bad the teachers are, but when in reality they don't do anything in class or at home (school-wise).

Now I have something to convince others that Public Schools own just as much as the various Catholic Schools around in my town.

I prefer that people actually do the assignments they are given instead of blaming everyone else, but that's me.

explain :confused:

I'm pretty sure the study is wrong on a paractical level. From personal experience.

I went to a high school in New Jersey - lots of writing, reading, essays, etc. . .

High school in Arizona - almost no writing or reading. Most of the classes were based upon movies or "feel good" self-esteem building exercises. Basically, a lot of bullshit (this is stuff my sister brings home)

Private school I went to in Arizona - lots of writing, lots of reading, lots of work. Education was better than the public school in NJ, much better than the public school in AZ.


So, as I have noticed from experience, the public schools themselves are very different, and the private schools (at least the one I went to) prefrom better.

My private school and the New Jersey public high school were had about the same level of income-earners supporting them.

The arizona public school is in a very rich section of the state. They still suck at life.

Yes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikrYzz1pxwU

It may be comedic, but there is more than a grain of truth in it. ;)

thanks for the link but i dont have the bandwidth to do video

perhaps you could summarize it for me?

That doesn't surprise me one bit. I know quite a few dumbasses who attended a Catholic primary school. Certainly no evidence of any "head start."

hmmmm....

My experience must be atypical. Because in Philadelphia, my Catholic primary school was loads better than the public schools. And it had nothing to do with socioeconomics, because something like 95% of the student population were of minority ethnic or racial groups, and something like 50% lived below what the government dictates as the poverty line. And yet the eighth graders consistently get thousands of dollars in high school scholarships, and school programs and teachers get citywide, statewide, and occassionally even national recognition for their work.

Some parochial school suck, yeah. Just like some public schools suck.

I would love to see a similar study in Oz. Particularly as 60% of federal funding now goes to private schools, and more is headed their way.

Stares at OP gayly (ok, maybe blithely)

Well done, that's how it's supposed to be!

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

In a nutshell: for those of you who tout private school educations as being superior to public school educations, a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

The full report can be read at the link above, and the article excerpt comes from American Educator, Fall 2006 issue, page 6.

Anyone who thinks that private companies would always do better because they're private just doesn't understand the concept.

The advantages that come from competition in the private sector come from lots of companies doing things differently so that the most successful will eventually be the only way it's done, either by eliminating competitors, or emulation by formerly less successful competitors.

That doesn't work with private companies competing for government contracts. If there are 5 companies who pick up trash in a town on a house by house basis, then those who charge too much or who don't provide a good enough service will go out of business. That's competition. Where's the competition that promotes service if these companies all bid on who will be the one company to pick up trash in the town? There isn't any. All they're promoting is low prices, but that just encourages fraud.

What about private prisons? If I'm arrested for armed robbery I don't get to decide what prison I'm going to pay rent in. How is one prison supposed to compete with another? They don't. Even if they're privatized prisons.

The same is true of school, highway maintanence, mass transit, and a lot of other services. Even with its inefficiencies, it's still cheaper and more effective to get it from the government. You essentially end up with all the inefficiency of government bureaucracy as well as the expense of private for-profit consumerism.

Thats just one report, private schools are still better.

*2,000 posts!*

Thats just one report, private schools are still better.

*2,000 posts!*

I disagreed with you until I got to the part that this is your 2000th post. How can anyone argue with that?

hmmmm....

My experience must be atypical. Because in Philadelphia, my Catholic primary school was loads better than the public schools. And it had nothing to do with socioeconomics, because something like 95% of the student population were of minority ethnic or racial groups, and something like 50% lived below what the government dictates as the poverty line. And yet the eighth graders consistently get thousands of dollars in high school scholarships, and school programs and teachers get citywide, statewide, and occassionally even national recognition for their work.

Some parochial school suck, yeah. Just like some public schools suck.

It's been my experience that the reason that most Catholic schools have such a statisticly higher performance rate is because they'll throw a student out for pretty much anything. When repording their rates on how many students graduate and go on to college they don't count the 75% of each incoming class that they expel before the end of their Freshman year.

If public schools were expelling 75% of each incoming class there'd be an uproar.

Thats just one report, private schools are still better.

*2,000 posts!*

According to what?

I know that conservatives like to put equal stock in facts as well as hearsay and uninformed opinion, but I'd like to know where you're getting that, because I've been looking at this issue for years and everything except Rush Limbaugh and Jerry Falwell seem to understand that public schools perform as well or better than private schools. On average.

In Australia, private schools tend to do better because of 2 reasons:

1. Because they charge fees and get government funding at a higher rate per student than public schools, they are far, far better resourced than their public counterparts.

2. They can choose which students attend their school, and can exclude students for breaking their code of conduct; public schools must take all students, regardless of results, behaviour, or socioeconomic background.

explain :confused:

You hear a lot of complaints that the education system is at fault; however, try pointing out to parents that their children simply are not doing the assignments, are distracted by their electronic devices (which, if you confiscate them, the parents have an aneurysm), disrupt the class, etc etc etc and the answer, by and large, is: "It's YOUR problem from 8-3."

So, with little support from the parents, the students feel they don't need to do a damned thing, and then blame the system for not learning.

I went to public school. I learned, because my parents valued education and would have beaten my behind if I were disruptive and disrespectful, would have told me "serves you right" if I had my toys taken away in school, and would not have tolerated less than my best try at learning what was set in front of me.

What we've taught students today is a sense of entitlement without any sense of responsibility -- and with that combination, it becomes "you failed me" rather than, "I failed to do what I was supposed to."

thanks for the link but i dont have the bandwidth to do video

perhaps you could summarize it for me?

Some people are idiots and expect the rest of us to cut them major slack while talking on all the responsibilities outselves.

http://earsucker.com/2006/09/11/lyrics-carlos-mencia-dee-dee-dee/ <-- the lyrics.

Thats just one report, private schools are still better.

*2,000 posts!*

Apparently not. Your reading comprehension seems to be lacking.

a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

A study in 2003.... and a study in 2006... would indicate more than "one report".
And there's supposed to be an apostrophe between the t and s in thats, since it is a contraction of "that is".

-snip-

Ah, I thought you took offense at my post, not that I contributed much in the heat of the moment anyway. To reiterate in a more constructive tone:

I do not see an advantage or a necessity in private schools outperforming public schools. However, I think it is preferable that there be a alternative, even if it costs more. That private schools are no better leaves me discontent.

I do think though, that I have a much greater responsibility to American education than to recognize its failing. I intend to homeschool my children though, should I have the time. I dont think of this as running away, I do not categorize the welfare of my children that way. If I dont have the time my opinion of public school is divided.

1st- I recognize the value of having a cooperative and steady child in class, especially when teachers cant get much respect from the rest. I would expect-and take action to ensure- my child is well-behaved.

-but-

I do not intend to tolerate any threat to my childs individual or intellectual growth.

We were asked in a uni lecture once our reaction to the news that 15 out of 100 Brisbane Grammar School students received an OP 1 (the highest mark a QLD student can receive - only 2% of students in each cohort receive an OP 1 at the end of year 12). We all responded that the news was not that surprising, they were an elite private school who charged exorbitant fees etc. etc. The lecturer then asked us to imagine that the news was that Woodridge State High School (an impoverished public school south of Brisbane in a welfare (and I mean welfare) class suburb) had 15 OP1's out of 100. We replied that that would be highly unusual and expressed the expectation that there would be an enquiry into how the event took place, along with recommendations for changing the assessment system to make it 'more representative of student abilities' (Having grown up in Woodridge, I was a lone voice saying it was possible).

Ah, I thought you took offense at my post, not that I contributed much in the heat of the moment anyway. To reiterate in a more constructive tone:

I do not see an advantage or a necessity in private schools outperforming public schools. However, I think it is preferable that there be a alternative, even if it costs more. That private schools are no better leaves me discontent.

I do think though, that I have a much greater responsibility to American education than to recognize its failing. I intend to homeschool my children though, should I have the time. I dont think of this as running away, I do not categorize the welfare of my children that way. If I dont have the time my opinion of public school is divided.

1st- I recognize the value of having a cooperative and steady child in class, especially when teachers cant get much respect from the rest. I would expect-and take action to ensure- my child is well-behaved.

-but-

I do not intend to tolerate any threat to my childs individual or intellectual growth.

Homeschooling is a perfectly valid practice, and if that's what you feel your kids need, then that's what they need.

I will say this: all children should have the right to an education.
They should also have the right to refuse it.
Why should those who are not interested in taking advantage of their education and who seek to disrupt everyone else's be allowed to do so? Let them get vocational training, or into a school-to-work program that gets them a job that will let them support themselves, and let those who wish to learn, learn.

I'm pretty sure the study is wrong on a paractical level. From personal experience.
Personal experiance does not a trend make, you'll need harder data than, "I think so" to refute the study.

Homeschooling is a perfectly valid practice, and if that's what you feel your kids need, then that's what they need.

I will say this: all children should have the right to an education.
They should also have the right to refuse it.
Why should those who are not interested in taking advantage of their education and who seek to disrupt everyone else's be allowed to do so? Let them get vocational training, or into a school-to-work program that gets them a job that will let them support themselves, and let those who wish to learn, learn.

I agree. Few things are as disruptive in a classroom as someone who is being forced to be there against their will. I do think that there is a cultural problem of looking down on education however, and that until it is resolved a relax in attendence laws could do permanent damage.

I will say this: all children should have the right to an education.
They should also have the right to refuse it.
Why should those who are not interested in taking advantage of their education and who seek to disrupt everyone else's be allowed to do so? Let them get vocational training, or into a school-to-work program that gets them a job that will let them support themselves, and let those who wish to learn, learn.
There's a problem with this though, I'm currently working in a system that is geared towards that. At the end of junior high school, my kids are asked to choose which path in life they will take(Indeed, they are asked to choose even earlier than that, but we'll go with the formal choice). They have to pick a type of high school to attend, academic, buisness, vocational/technical or drop out all together.

There's no second chances in the Japanese system, once they make that choice, that's what they are stuck with, even if later on they find out that they have the need and drive to learn.

I actually consider it a strength of the US system that it allows students to be educated to a level that will allow them multible chances at learning throughout their lives.

It's been my experience that the reason that most Catholic schools have such a statisticly higher performance rate is because they'll throw a student out for pretty much anything. When repording their rates on how many students graduate and go on to college they don't count the 75% of each incoming class that they expel before the end of their Freshman year.

If public schools were expelling 75% of each incoming class there'd be an uproar.

In my gradeschool, only students who commited the most egregious offenses were expelled. Most students did not commit such offenses, though, because their parents made great sacrifices to send them there, and they knew it. In stead of expulsion, most conduct violations were dealt with by taking away the student's recess, making the student sit in the hall for a period of time, or worst of all, sending a "Green Slip" home. The parent had to sign the green slip, which detailed the student's offense. This was a huge deal. Sometimes, if you were particularly bad, you got suspended. But rarely were kids expelled.

Its like Kat said:

You hear a lot of complaints that the education system is at fault; however, try pointing out to parents that their children simply are not doing the assignments, are distracted by their electronic devices (which, if you confiscate them, the parents have an aneurysm), disrupt the class, etc etc etc and the answer, by and large, is: "It's YOUR problem from 8-3."

So, with little support from the parents, the students feel they don't need to do a damned thing, and then blame the system for not learning.

I went to public school. I learned, because my parents valued education and would have beaten my behind if I were disruptive and disrespectful, would have told me "serves you right" if I had my toys taken away in school, and would not have tolerated less than my best try at learning what was set in front of me.

What we've taught students today is a sense of entitlement without any sense of responsibility -- and with that combination, it becomes "you failed me" rather than, "I failed to do what I was supposed to."

Homeschooling is a perfectly valid practice, and if that's what you feel your kids need, then that's what they need.

I will say this: all children should have the right to an education.
They should also have the right to refuse it.
Why should those who are not interested in taking advantage of their education and who seek to disrupt everyone else's be allowed to do so? Let them get vocational training, or into a school-to-work program that gets them a job that will let them support themselves, and let those who wish to learn, learn.

Wow, you yanks are behind the times:p ! In Queensland, we have school-based apprenticeships and vocational education subjects. School-based apprenticeships mean that one day a week, students go and work with an employer, instead of coming to school. The other days they generally do vocational education subjects. When they finish senior (grades 11-12), they go into the second year of their apprenticeship. This way, they get a Senior Certificate and can begin their apprenticeship at school.Cuts down on the behaviour issues, because the students who would normally be mucking around, bored are actually working towards their goal.

Some people are idiots and expect the rest of us to cut them major slack while talking on all the responsibilities outselves.

http://earsucker.com/2006/09/11/lyrics-carlos-mencia-dee-dee-dee/ <-- the lyrics.

thanks

a friend of mine got a job at a posh catholic highschool someplace in michigan as her first teaching job. (back in '79)

it drove her crazy because no matter how tough the quizzes were, the most mouthy kids still did well. however she had to give a couple of kids "C's". their parents came in and said "johnny doesnt get 'C's' ". naive new teacher that she was she reached to her grade book to show them that johnny did indeed earn a C. the parents just looked at her and said "no. johnny doesnt GET C's"

with parents like that who actually pay the bills for the school. its no wonder that the private schools dont do better.

thanks

a friend of mine got a job at a posh catholic highschool someplace in michigan as her first teaching job. (back in '79)

it drove her crazy because no matter how tough the quizzes were, the most mouthy kids still did well. however she had to give a couple of kids "C's". their parents came in and said "johnny doesnt get 'C's' ". naive new teacher that she was she reached to her grade book to show them that johnny did indeed earn a C. the parents just looked at her and said "no. johnny doesnt GET C's"

with parents like that who actually pay the bills for the school. its no wonder that the private schools dont do better.

It depends on the school and the principle. I remember Sister Mary-Sean. If you did bad, you did bad and a checkbook would not correct that.

I remember waiting outside her office for my usual punishment detail and overheard her saying "I think your son might like it better at another school" They left in a huff but the boy remained!

It depends on the school and the principle. I remember Sister Mary-Sean. If you did bad, you did bad and a checkbook would not correct that.

I remember waiting outside her office for my usual punishment detail and overheard her saying "I think your son might like it better at another school" They left in a huff but the boy remained!
Yeah, in my Catholic grade and high school, students were given grades based on the amount of work correctly completed. Not based on the size of their parents wallets. But then, they weren't fancy pants catholic schools catering to the rich.

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

In a nutshell: for those of you who tout private school educations as being superior to public school educations, a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

The full report can be read at the link above, and the article excerpt comes from American Educator, Fall 2006 issue, page 6.

Oh? I tend to support a nationalized free open educational system. :) Just look at the US education system, it is about in shambles, maybe that's why they routinely import students from India.

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

In a nutshell: for those of you who tout private school educations as being superior to public school educations, a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

The full report can be read at the link above, and the article excerpt comes from American Educator, Fall 2006 issue, page 6.
Makes perfect sense to me. Private schools are notorious for feeding one line of propaganda or another to the kids more than real education anyway.

Apparently not. Your reading comprehension seems to be lacking.



A study in 2003.... and a study in 2006... would indicate more than "one report".

Ok, two reports. These reports though are based just on numbers and stats, not on the real world. Private schools are better funded and staffed than their public counterparts. It doesn't take a genius to figure out an inner city school in Detroit won't preform as well as that of a private school is say Mass.

And there's supposed to be an apostrophe between the t and s in thats, since it is a contraction of "that is".
How right you are and if I were writing a research paper which I have written many of, there would have been one. However I can type faster without the " ' " and you can understand what Im saying without it so....

Ok, two reports. These reports though are based just on numbers and stats, not on the real world.

"Numbers and stats" from the real world.

You know, those weird things called facts.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out an inner city school in Detroit won't preform as well as that of a private school is say Mass.

Yes, but that is a comparison that tells us nothing useful.

Ok, two reports. These reports though are based just on numbers and stats, not on the real world. Private schools are better funded and staffed than their public counterparts. It doesn't take a genius to figure out an inner city school in Detroit won't preform as well as that of a private school is say Mass.
And everyone knows the world is flat.

That's why we use numbers and stats.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out an inner city school in Detroit won't preform as well as that of a private school is say Mass.
No shit, Sherlock.
And it doesn't take a genius to understand that they were making comparable studies. So an inner Detroit city school wouldn't be compared with a private Massachausetts school. There's no point.
Instead a public Mass school would be. And I dare say they'd be little statistical difference between the two.


It's almost like arguing with ID people here, in terms of obfuscating and changing the arguments to maintain their position.
First they won't accept anything without facts. When given facts, they argue it's not enough to draw conclusion. When given more facts, they claim that they're not statistically reliable. When pointed out that these are, they fall back on anecdotal 'evidence' as ultimate 'proof' they're still correct.

I'm now waiting for them to drag some ancient, decades-old, study out that shows they're right. Nothing beats current research like out-dated studies.

I think that as far as class size is concerned, it all depends on the subject.
Depends on the subject, the topic and the level of the student.

But the general point remains that the smaller the class, the better the grades.
Not too small though. <12 restricts the amount of group work you can do for eg.

No shit, Sherlock.
And it doesn't take a genius to understand that they were making comparable studies. So an inner Detroit city school wouldn't be compared with a private Massachausetts school. There's no point.
Instead a public Mass school would be. And I dare say they'd be little statistical difference between the two.


It's almost like arguing with ID people here, in terms of obfuscating and changing the arguments to maintain their position.
First they won't accept anything without facts. When given facts, they argue it's not enough to draw conclusion. When given more facts, they claim that they're not statistically reliable. When pointed out that these are, they fall back on anecdotal 'evidence' as ultimate 'proof' they're still correct.

I'm now waiting for them to drag some ancient, decades-old, study out that shows they're right. Nothing beats current research like out-dated studies.

But the "facts" you cite dont really tell us much as they are just numbers drawn up in a static environment, instead of real world scenarios.

But the "facts" you cite dont really tell us much as they are just numbers drawn up in a static environment, instead of real world scenarios.

First, you can drop the quotes around the word "facts". They are. Accept it and deal with it. That is what the research showed. You can read their methodology, you can study the article, and if you can effectively display how it fails, then you can claim it as "facts". Untill then, they are facts.

And what "real world scenarios" would you like to see? Should a survey of likely voters in a presidential election give us a scenario? This isn't baseball. I don't need to know that when a student has a last name starting with M, and he is 6'1" tall, and he takes math and English on Tuesdays, but only English on Thursdays and only math on Fridays, and is given 3.5 hours of homework during fall, but 4 hours in winter, he has a 35% chance of getting a B or better. What I do need to know, and what this study demonstrates, is that comparable private schools perform the same as their public counterparts. A public school with an average income of 100,000 a year performs the same as a private school with the same average income, etc.

But the "facts" you cite dont really tell us much as they are just numbers drawn up in a static environment, instead of real world scenarios.
No, they tell us an awful lot, namely that all things being equal, public schools equal or out-perform private schools in math, and equal or under-perform private schools in reading.

It goes to show that people who claim that privatization will fix all woes in the school system due to private schools out-performing their public counterparts on tests have ignored characteristics that educators have been harping about for years.

Just because you don't like it doesn't make the conclusions any different.

Private schools only seems to suceed so well because of selection, they unlike public schools can choose not accept kids who arn't very smart. They can also expel kids alot easier, usually expeling the not so smart kids for the most minor of offences.

Private schools only seems to suceed so well because of selection, they unlike public schools can choose not accept kids who arn't very smart. They can also expel kids alot easier, usually expeling the not so smart kids for the most minor of offences.

That's discrimination. There should be an open free education for all, not quality for a *select* few.

And I still attend the top public high school in the nation according to the Wall Street Journal (at least it was last year). :p However, most of the so called top schools in the nation are private. My elementary and middle school, however, were in lower-class neighborhoods in Brooklyn, and those schools were very crapy public schools. My friends who went to private elementary schools seem to be more successful so far than my friends who went to my school, a few of whom have dropped out/are criminals/are in jail.

There are plenty of private schools that are better than most public schools, and plenty of public schools better than most private schools. I think the study shows it mostly balances out, which I suspected anyway.

Wow, you yanks are behind the times:p ! In Queensland, we have school-based apprenticeships and vocational education subjects. School-based apprenticeships mean that one day a week, students go and work with an employer, instead of coming to school. The other days they generally do vocational education subjects. When they finish senior (grades 11-12), they go into the second year of their apprenticeship. This way, they get a Senior Certificate and can begin their apprenticeship at school.Cuts down on the behaviour issues, because the students who would normally be mucking around, bored are actually working towards their goal.
Not really we had work release as well... in the middle of minnesota for at least the last 10 years probably before as well

It depends on the school and the principle. I remember Sister Mary-Sean. If you did bad, you did bad and a checkbook would not correct that.

I remember waiting outside her office for my usual punishment detail and overheard her saying "I think your son might like it better at another school" They left in a huff but the boy remained!

absolutely

but parents today seem to more often defend their children even when they are in the wrong instead of backing up the teacher.

i always backed up the teacher even when i felt the teacher was in the wrong. its more important that my son learn to respect authority than to win every fight that comes along. (i did, however, refuse to consider letting them suspend my son for pointing a PEN at a kid and saying "bang")

when you have posh private schools of whatever stripe with highpaid successful parents, you get more parents to whom their childs grades are more important than their childs actual education. parents who know that making a fuss or threatening a lawsuit can get them what they want even when their kids are obviously in the wrong. this kind of shit erodes the value of a private education.

Wow, you yanks are behind the times:p ! In Queensland, we have school-based apprenticeships and vocational education subjects. School-based apprenticeships mean that one day a week, students go and work with an employer, instead of coming to school. The other days they generally do vocational education subjects. When they finish senior (grades 11-12), they go into the second year of their apprenticeship. This way, they get a Senior Certificate and can begin their apprenticeship at school.Cuts down on the behaviour issues, because the students who would normally be mucking around, bored are actually working towards their goal.

We used to have that sort of thing, actually. Funding cut by Federal Government. After all, all children can learn the same things, and are all exactly the same, and all of COURSE are academically inclined and Uni-bound.

Nope, no one interested in being a plumber, or mechanic, or electrician (who all, btw, make a lot more than me!) ;)

I went to public schools mainly because there was not a private school in the area. The education that I got in school was terrible while what I learned elsewhere made up for that.

But the "facts" you cite dont really tell us much as they are just numbers drawn up in a static environment, instead of real world scenarios.

How is comparing real life public school a and real life public school b "just numbers drawn up in a static environment?"

I wouldn't be so sure that private schools are so much better staffed and funded. Public schools have certification requirements including a BA and an MA in your particular area of study, and pretty rigorous testing.

http://nysut.org/research/bulletins/teachercertification.html#2

PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATION

A provisional certificate is the first credential an individual will receive upon satisfactory completion of all teacher preparation requirements. The certificate is issued on either February 1 st or September 1 st and expires five years from the date of issuance. A permanent certificate must be obtained within the five-year period of validity. The last provisional certificates will be issued on February 1, 2004. The requirements for a provisional certificate would include:

* Application with fee;
* Baccalaureate degree;
* Professional education coursework;
* Student teaching;
* Subject matter specialization;
* Language other than English - one year of study or its equivalent;
* New York State Teacher Certification Examinations:
o Liberal Arts and Sciences Test (LAST)
o Assessment of Teaching Skills – Written (ATS-W)
o Some certificate titles require a Content Specialty Test (CST); if a "major" is not indicated on the transcript, but 36 semester hours in the subject area are listed, the appropriate Content Specialty Test will be required for the provisional certificate;
* Child Abuse Identification workshop;
* School Violence Prevention workshop; and
* Fingerprint clearance.

PERMANENT CERTIFICATION

A permanent certificate is valid for life in the area of certification and would be issued upon completion of the following requirements:

* Satisfied the requirements for the provisional certificate;
* Application with fee;
* Master's degree ( The graduate study which will culminate in a graduate degree must be “functionally related” to the subject field or grade level in which certification is being requested. The term “functionally related” means that the graduate degree program is job-related, as determined by the Commissioner.);
* Two years of teaching experience in a public or nonpublic school ( The teaching experience requirement means a minimum of two years of paid full-time elementary and/or secondary service. It is possible to combine different teaching experiences to meet the two-year requirements.);
* If required for the certificate title, New York State Teacher Certification Examinations:
o CST
o Assessment of Teaching Skills-Performance (ATS-P); this is also known as the performance video; and
* United States Permanent Resident status


Private schools require... whatever the private school decides to require. Sometimes as good, sometimes better, sometimes just a BA.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/economic_surveys/006685.html

Hmm, so public school systems in the US spend quite a lot of money per student. How much is spent per student in private schools?

The difference is that public schools cannot dump struggling students because they do not meet a certain grade, whereas private schools can and do.

How is comparing real life public school a and real life public school b "just numbers drawn up in a static environment?"

I wouldn't be so sure that private schools are so much better staffed and funded. Public schools have certification requirements including a BA and an MA in your particular area of study, and pretty rigorous testing.

http://nysut.org/research/bulletins/teachercertification.html#2



Private schools require... whatever the private school decides to require. Sometimes as good, sometimes better, sometimes just a BA.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/economic_surveys/006685.html

Hmm, so public school systems in the US spend quite a lot of money per student. How much is spent per student in private schools?

The difference is that public schools cannot dump struggling students because they do not meet a certain grade, whereas private schools can and do.

Is that master's degree a made up master's degree or one in the "real world." You know, the real world being the one in which some people live where everything they believe is right? You must be using real world statistics to actually solve a real world problem. Those aren't applicable in the "real world." Try not to argue with those who refuse to see your point for fear of being wrong. Some people feel that admitting they are wrong would cause their whole world to crumble and suddenly Jesus Christ would cease to exist in their life. People are stupid but I think you knew that already.

Depends on the subject, the topic and the level of the student.

But the general point remains that the smaller the class, the better the grades.
Not too small though. <12 restricts the amount of group work you can do for eg.

15 would be optimal.
I'd fall down on my knees and praise God for a cap of 21.
The current 34 is rough... times five.

Is that master's degree a made up master's degree or one in the "real world." You know, the real world being the one in which some people live where everything they believe is right? You must be using real world statistics to actually solve a real world problem. Those aren't applicable in the "real world." Try not to argue with those who refuse to see your point for fear of being wrong. Some people feel that admitting they are wrong would cause their whole world to crumble and suddenly Jesus Christ would cease to exist in their life. People are stupid but I think you knew that already.

Aye, but rather than simply making stuff up, I tend to like to back it up so that the open-minded might... I don't know... learn something they didn't know. ;)

15 would be optimal.
I'd fall down on my knees and praise God for a cap of 21.
The current 34 is rough... times five.
My current class load:

7th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 38
3rd kumi: 37
4th kumi: 38

8th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 36
3rd kumi: 38
4th kumi: 37

9th:
1st kumi: 40
2nd kumi: 39
3rd kumi: 39
4th kumi: 40

Yup, Kat is right, trying to teach English to these numbers is rough, even with two teachers in the room.

My current class load:

7th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 38
3rd kumi: 37
4th kumi: 38

8th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 36
3rd kumi: 38
4th kumi: 37

9th:
1st kumi: 40
2nd kumi: 39
3rd kumi: 39
4th kumi: 40

Yup, Kat is right, trying to teach English to these numbers is rough, even with two teachers in the room.
That's ridiculous. I can't see how you could do any even 1/2-decent TESOL to classes that size. You're forced into teaching by rote mostly, I take it.

That's ridiculous. I can't see how you could do any even 1/2-decent TESOL to classes that size. You're forced into teaching by rote mostly, I take it.
Pretty much. It also makes it very easy for kids to hide since to do a full sweep of the room to listen and correct every student takes about 10 minutes or so.

My current class load:

7th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 38
3rd kumi: 37
4th kumi: 38

8th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 36
3rd kumi: 38
4th kumi: 37

9th:
1st kumi: 40
2nd kumi: 39
3rd kumi: 39
4th kumi: 40

Yup, Kat is right, trying to teach English to these numbers is rough, even with two teachers in the room.


*hugs*
Ok, you officially have it worse than we do in the States.

Ok, two reports. These reports though are based just on numbers and stats, not on the real world. Private schools are better funded and staffed than their public counterparts. It doesn't take a genius to figure out an inner city school in Detroit won't preform as well as that of a private school is say Mass.


How right you are and if I were writing a research paper which I have written many of, there would have been one. However I can type faster without the " ' " and you can understand what Im saying without it so....

Well, if you were trying to make a point about private schools being better, and you are a product of such...

*hugs*
Ok, you officially have it worse than we do in the States.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

From my adult class:

Student: A junior high student committed suicide because of bullying.

Me: That's really sad.

Student: Do American students do that too because of bullying?

Me: Sometimes, sometimes they can do worse things.

Student: What?

Me: Sometimes they bring guns to school and shoot other people and then kill themselves.

I personally think I benefited from attending a private school. There was a lot more peer pressure to perform well (I'm not sure if that was just my school though) than there was at the high school my brother attended. Also, there was less bullying, which is always a good thing. :)

That's interesting, because my friend had the opposite experience.

I went to a large public school. Found my social niche, had a pretty good time, did well.

He went to a much smaller private school. He had a really hard time, because there, he really stuck out being different, and from the way he talked about it, the place seemed like a real drug den, like the social atmosphere was such that if you did more than simply meet the requirements, you were weird.

I've always found the "private schools are better" myth amazing. Teachers have to meet much more strict requirements to teach at a public school than at a private one, and that to me says a lot.

Plus, part of it is socioeconomic.

Rich kids tend to come from literate, educated families that have books at home while poor kids might not have any books in their home and there might not be anyone very educated in their family. Yes, this is a generalization, but it seems to hold pretty true.

15 would be optimal.
I'd fall down on my knees and praise God for a cap of 21.
The current 34 is rough... times five.

My current class load:

7th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 38
3rd kumi: 37
4th kumi: 38

8th:
1st kumi: 37
2nd kumi: 36
3rd kumi: 38
4th kumi: 37

9th:
1st kumi: 40
2nd kumi: 39
3rd kumi: 39
4th kumi: 40

Yup, Kat is right, trying to teach English to these numbers is rough, even with two teachers in the room.
*begins to have those nightmares about a student mutiny again* :(

*hugs*
Ok, you officially have it worse than we do in the States.
In China the average class size is 50 - 60. That said, from what I've been told by Chinese Teachers, the students sit up straight with their arms folded on the desk the whole time unless writing. They don't speak in class unless told to by the teacher. If they want to ask a question, they'll raise their right arm to be perpendicular to the desk with their elbow still resting on it.
So classroom discipline must be pretty easy there. Having fun interactive lessons would be impossible though, I bet. They'd have no idea what to do.

Last school I was at here in Hong Kong, the average class size was 32-36, which is typical for primary here (it's around 40 for secondary school). I would do reading lessons with them reading out the book page by page. I thought that they were progressing well. That is until I tested students individually on their reading level. Some of them could barely read their own damn names.

I'm now at a small village school, where the largest class has 18 students, smallest 9.
A lot more fun.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

From my adult class:

Student: A junior high student committed suicide because of bullying.

Me: That's really sad.

Student: Do American students do that too because of bullying?

Me: Sometimes, sometimes they can do worse things.

Student: What?

Me: Sometimes they bring guns to school and shoot other people and then kill themselves.

Suicide is the leading cause of death among 12-24 years here, due to the pressures of school.
To make matters worse, the Police won't even record it as suicide if they don't leave a note. Yet it's still the most common way of teens shuffling off this mortal coil.

nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

In a nutshell: for those of you who tout private school educations as being superior to public school educations, a study by Chris Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubiensk showed "that when important factors like students' socioeconomic status were taken into account, public schools did as well as -- and in some cases better than -- private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress... in mathematics. In July 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released a study with a similar methodology -- and similar results."

The full report can be read at the link above, and the article excerpt comes from American Educator, Fall 2006 issue, page 6.

I don't think that most private schools produce a "better" education than a public school.

I just think they deliver the goods, on a cost per student basis, for less money.

There are quite a few studies out there that show this. There's something dumb about the idea that "more money is better", especially if it's wasted money.

I just think they deliver the goods, on a cost per student basis, for less money.

There are quite a few studies out there that show this.
Then I am sure you'll be glad to show us them.

I am particuarly interested in an even study. In other words, I really would like to see the per student basis once things that private schools do not have to pay for, ESL or special education for example, are actually accounted for.

Then I am sure you'll be glad to show us them.

I am particuarly interested in an even study. In other words, I really would like to see the per student basis once things that private schools do not have to pay for, ESL or special education for example, are actually accounted for.

Can't forget that they have to subsidize school lunches, sometimes bringing the cost down from over $5 to $0.10 (and, in some areas, even less)

Can't forget that they have to subsidize school lunches, sometimes bringing the cost down from over $5 to $0.10 (and, in some areas, even less)



What?! Where is this?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

From my adult class:

Student: A junior high student committed suicide because of bullying.

Me: That's really sad.

Student: Do American students do that too because of bullying?

Me: Sometimes, sometimes they can do worse things.

Student: What?

Me: Sometimes they bring guns to school and shoot other people and then kill themselves.

"Society nods it's head at any horror the American teenager can think to bring upon itself!" -JD from Heathers

What?! Where is this?

The US. It is part of the reduced lunch program. Schools are required to provide a nutritious, affordable meal for students since not all will get meals at home. My town reduces it to $2.10 for most students, and down to $0.10 for those meeting certain requirements. The cost per lunch (IE, the ammount the school spends to make the lunch) is currently about $5.50