Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are loads of great public schools throughout America. However, in my district you are only allowed to go to the school you are zoned for. That said, I can't go to Riverwood, Union Grove, Fayetteville High, or any of the other school folks have stated as being public school options. I have never disputed there are many good public schools. As I stated, I attended public schools growing up. But right now, for my family, for my kids, public school is simply not an option. I have many friends with kids in public schools, my mother in law and godmother are both retired public school teachers. But the truth is, for the great schools that do exist, there are many that range from abysmal to average at best.
I believe that we need to save our public schools if we are to be competitive in a global market. I can afford to put my kids in a better school (not by scrimping and saving every penny as RainyRainy suggests) than my county affords. But what about those brilliant kids whose parents aren't so lucky, or so involved? What becomes of them? The kid that attends a low performing school with disinterested teachers might be the kid that could discover a cure for Alzheimer's with the proper education. However, I was a math and english major, not an education major, and I have no idea how to save the public school system.
But I'm sorry, I do think it's broken. NOT EVERY SCHOOL, but many.
There are loads of great public schools throughout America. However, in my district you are only allowed to go to the school you are zoned for. That said, I can't go to Riverwood, Union Grove, Fayetteville High, or any of the other school folks have stated as being public school options. I have never disputed there are many good public schools. As I stated, I attended public schools growing up. But right now, for my family, for my kids, public school is simply not an option. I have many friends with kids in public schools, my mother in law and godmother are both retired public school teachers. But the truth is, for the great schools that do exist, there are many that range from abysmal to average at best.
I believe that we need to save our public schools if we are to be competitive in a global market. I can afford to put my kids in a better school (not by scrimping and saving every penny as RainyRainy suggests) than my county affords. But what about those brilliant kids whose parents aren't so lucky, or so involved? What becomes of them? The kid that attends a low performing school with disinterested teachers might be the kid that could discover a cure for Alzheimer's with the proper education. However, I was a math and english major, not an education major, and I have no idea how to save the public school system.
But I'm sorry, I do think it's broken. NOT EVERY SCHOOL, but many.
I agree with your thoughts.
If I had a child, which I don't have, I would certainly send them to a private school if I felt the school system was inferior. And much too often, that seems to be the case.
Look at the problems we currently have with school boards here in metro Atlanta. I'm sure the problems at the top of the food chain filter down to principals, individual schools, and individual teachers. To blindly trust what a public school system is reporting with test scores and with quantified numbers would be foolish. Whatever the quantified number is across the board, assume the ACUTUAL quantified number is lower.
Your child's school years are very important. Sometimes you can drop the ball, and the children come out OK. But don't count on it.
A child's self-esteem is very important. If a child has self-esteem issues when he/she graduates from high school, that's a huge negative. Puberty and the teen years are very difficult years anyway, so you want to provide a great learning environment for them in which they will thrive and excel.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't think I said that all public school education is inferior. What I believe I said was that I don't believe in speaking in absolutes, I speak in generalities. And then I said the MOST elite private schools (read Westminster, Woodward, Lovett, etc) offer a more SOLID (notice I didn't say BETTER) education than many public schools (read Douglass High, Fairview Elementary, Austin Rd Middle, etc). I also stated that there are many great public schools that offer an education on par with private schools (Inman Park Middle has a 10 rating on GreatSchools.com, not to mention Fayetteville High has comparable numbers to Landmark Christian Academy.)
HOWEVER, as I stated, I don't live near any of these schools, so private school is my best option.
What I find irritating is when someone gets on their soapbox w/o fully reading and ingesting what I've said.
Sorry to have inadvertently given offense. I was trying to write a summary of my thoughts on these public-versus-private skirmishes. My post was inspired by your comments but absolutely not a direct response to only what you wrote. In my mind, I thought you had made it clear that you fall into the class of people who are choosing private school because their local public schools are weak, and they can afford private.
However, you did claim, in two posts, that "... private schools can ability group, and public schools are not able to ...." That's not true.
There are loads of great public schools throughout America. However, in my district you are only allowed to go to the school you are zoned for. That said, I can't go to Riverwood, Union Grove, Fayetteville High, or any of the other school folks have stated as being public school options. I have never disputed there are many good public schools. As I stated, I attended public schools growing up. But right now, for my family, for my kids, public school is simply not an option. I have many friends with kids in public schools, my mother in law and godmother are both retired public school teachers. But the truth is, for the great schools that do exist, there are many that range from abysmal to average at best.
I believe that we need to save our public schools if we are to be competitive in a global market. I can afford to put my kids in a better school (not by scrimping and saving every penny as RainyRainy suggests) than my county affords. But what about those brilliant kids whose parents aren't so lucky, or so involved? What becomes of them? The kid that attends a low performing school with disinterested teachers might be the kid that could discover a cure for Alzheimer's with the proper education. However, I was a math and english major, not an education major, and I have no idea how to save the public school system.
But I'm sorry, I do think it's broken. NOT EVERY SCHOOL, but many.
I believe that the brilliant students are going to perform/succeed whether they attend a high or low performing school, so it really doesn't affect them all that much. My brightest students from past years of teaching could have been taught by monkeys and still found success. The most intelligent and successful people come from a wide variety of school settings...some prestigious, some low-performing. I'm not criticizing your choice to send your kids to private school, but it's sad to read your derogatory comments about public schools.
Not to nitpick, but your post insinuates that low-performing schools employ disinterested teachers. Let me just say that I have worked in and experienced lower-performing public schools, and the staff has always been just as motivated and passionate as any higher-performing school. It's easy to blame the teachers, but the problems with those schools go much deeper than that.
Sorry to have inadvertently given offense. I was trying to write a summary of my thoughts on these public-versus-private skirmishes. My post was inspired by your comments but absolutely not a direct response to only what you wrote. In my mind, I thought you had made it clear that you fall into the class of people who are choosing private school because their local public schools are weak, and they can afford private.
However, you did claim, in two posts, that "... private schools can ability group, and public schools are not able to ...." That's not true.
Yes, public schools are very big on ability grouping in many situations...but they also think it's important to have students of various abilities working together in some situations.
I agree that it doesn't make sense to say that public schools are weak. Schools within a particular system can vary from one end of the spectrum to the other, so they need to be viewed individually in order to make a proper assessment.
I believe that the brilliant students are going to perform/succeed whether they attend a high or low performing school, so it really doesn't affect them all that much. My brightest students from past years of teaching could have been taught by monkeys and still found success. The most intelligent and successful people come from a wide variety of school settings...some prestigious, some low-performing. I'm not criticizing your choice to send your kids to private school, but it's sad to read your derogatory comments about public schools.
Not to nitpick, but your post insinuates that low-performing schools employ disinterested teachers. Let me just say that I have worked in and experienced lower-performing public schools, and the staff has always been just as motivated and passionate as any higher-performing school. It's easy to blame the teachers, but the problems with those schools go much deeper than that.
I believe that brilliant students will accomplish more if they have better access to a more rigourous and challenging curriculum. The more information you have access to, the more you can do with that information.
Also, I realize you don't know me so you wouldn't realize this, but I never insinuate anything. I'm very direct. Not all low-performing schools have disinterested teachers, but some do. Not all high-achieving schools have involved teachers, but most do. What I am actually saying is that there are some low-performing schools that have disinterested teachers. What happens to the smart kids in those schools?
Yes, there are many problems endemic to the public school system, and I'm not suggesting that teachers are the primary problem. Actually I believe the primary problem is disinterested parents, or uninvolved, as I said in my earlier post. But as unfair as it is, if a kid is growing up with uninvolved parents, he needs passionate teachers in school, and some schools just don't have that. And if you have disinterested teachers in a high-performing school with involved parents, then it isn't as disastrous as when you have disinterested teachers in low-performing schools with uninvolved parents.
I am not trying to offend teachers, because I don't think they are the main problem, but the public school system in general doesn't function as well as it should, doesn't perform as well as public school systems in other first world countries, and doesn't function as well as it did 20 years ago.
And again, NOT ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, but many of them.
However, you did claim, in two posts, that "... private schools can ability group, and public schools are not able to ...." That's not true.
Thank you for clarifying your point, I do understand now and I'm not offended. I meant the ability grouping thing though, and in my opinion it is true, in the sense that I meant it. Private schools give assessment tests and place students accordingly. They routinely reevaluate the placement groups, and reassign kids as need be. I've seen groups that consisted of just 2 kids. If a child isn't performing up to their stated standards, they may suggest the repeating the grade, or extra help, but ultimately they will ask the parents to remove the child, as they may not be equipped to handle the child's needs.
In publc school, yes they have challenge classes and magnet programs, but they don't have the facilities, resources, or personnel to address different learning levels within the classroom (without pulling the kids out for specialists). And in the end, are obligated to teach every child, and cannot ask for slower kids (who are not special needs kids, but just aren't able to catch on as quickly as some others) to be removed.
That's what I meant by ability grouping not existing in public schools. My friends with kids in public school have to leave the classroom to attend their supplemental class. Which is in part I'm sure because you've got one poor overworked teacher having to attend to everyone's needs. My friends with kids in private school have the ability grouping within the classroom, which in part is probably because there are two teachers in the classroom, sharing the workload. Plus kids are also being rotated out to library, computer, music, etc. so there may be only 10 kids in the classroom at any one time.
Again, I don't speak in absolutes, only generalities, so I do realize EVERY public school doesn't have overworked teachers. Some are great, but many are not.
I agree that it doesn't make sense to say that public schools are weak. Schools within a particular system can vary from one end of the spectrum to the other, so they need to be viewed individually in order to make a proper assessment.
But many public schools are weak. And pretending that they aren't so as to not offend anyone isn't going to make our kids competitive in a global market. Of course schools within a system can vary - take APS - Inman Middle in Midtown is a great school, but Turner Middle in NW Atlanta is a horrible school. And we can't ignore the fact that we've got an entire school of kids at Turner who are performing abysmally on state tests. They can't all be subpar. Surely the school - be it the administrators, the teachers, the coursework, the board, or their own lack of parental involvement - but someone, something is failing them.
But many public schools are weak. And pretending that they aren't so as to not offend anyone isn't going to make our kids competitive in a global market. Of course schools within a system can vary - take APS - Inman Middle in Midtown is a great school, but Turner Middle in NW Atlanta is a horrible school. And we can't ignore the fact that we've got an entire school of kids at Turner who are performing abysmally on state tests. They can't all be subpar. Surely the school - be it the administrators, the teachers, the coursework, the board, or their own lack of parental involvement - but someone, something is failing them.
But the big question is...by what measurement do you consider the schools "weak"? How is Turner Middle School "horrible"?
But the big question is...by what measurement do you consider the schools "weak"? How is Turner Middle School "horrible"?
Low test scores, low GPA's, high absenteeism, low parental support, low parental presence, large numbers of "disruptive" children who can't be properly disciplined by policies in place and take time away from children who do come ready to learn to name a few things.
Surely you acknowledge that there are low performing schools in the public school system. I'm not saying it was a great solution, but if there weren't schools that performed better than others, then why did we initiate the "no child left behind act"?
And no, AGAIN, I'm not saying all public schools, nor am I saying that all private schools are high-performing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I meant the ability grouping thing though, and in my opinion it is true, in the sense that I meant it. Private schools give assessment tests and place students accordingly. They routinely reevaluate the placement groups, and reassign kids as need be. I've seen groups that consisted of just 2 kids. If a child isn't performing up to their stated standards, they may suggest the repeating the grade, or extra help, but ultimately they will ask the parents to remove the child, as they may not be equipped to handle the child's needs.
