Education Public vs. Privet

Personaly im , on the side of public. nothing angers me more then prep schools. I my self have seen both sides of the issue. KG- 8th grade of middle school i went to public school. freshmen and sophmore year i went to privet school (notre dame prep to be exact).

Now i understand why privet schooling looks appealing. My parents thought they were PAYING for something when later they found out that all they got out of thier wasted 3200$(a year) was a ulgy uniform and a bunch of books.

I am attending pulic school now and am getting the same educational quality i was recieveing from Prep school. Honors and Ap classes for me, no sweat! im a good kid and i wouldnt lie. nothing has changed grade wise and difficulty wise.

One thing really bothers me tho ! If i work my butt off in Public school and get a 4.0 i could get into a good college right? and do somehitng with my life. Now... if i went to Prep school and that word "prep" showed up on my transcript but i got a 3.0 i could still get into yale, or stanford. I would have payed my way into success.

Now i guess i could blame that on how society works these days but i was just wondering your oppinions!

TIM

 

Education Public vs. Privet

In this case I'm in favour of public education. I certainly wouldn't want a son or daughter of mine becoming a hedge.

 

Hey, Az, you guys will have fun with this, especially with your Public schools! My school in Sydney was part of that old English tradition, it was a GPS - Greater Public Schools.

You guys are wierd, you English bed wetting types!

E_S

 

Such stereotypes! Next you'll be saying, we used to play rugger and then drew lots for the master...

Oh blast... its time for my tea break.

In all seriousness, I went to a state comprehensive school until I was 14; then sat a 14+ examination, where the top 25% go to a 'grant-maintained' grammar school. I stayed there till I was 18 and then went to uni to do my BSc and MA. I think of myself as a bit of a socialist, however, if I had the money, I'd defintely consider paying for my sprog's education. Especially in modern Britain.

 

"Now... if i went to Prep school and that word "prep" showed up on my transcript but i got a 3.0 i could still get into yale, or stanford. I would have payed my way into success."

Since both Yale and Stanford require essays as part of the application process, I would say "probably not."

AYBABTU?

 

yeah im on the side of public. let the government and taxpayers pay for my education. im really tired of ass-kissing and paying tribute to millionaires. its really not money that should matter and i feel a great level of hypocracy that occurs in the philosophy and teachings at many private schools, having attended them my whole life (with the exception of once...)


the appeal that comes from private schools comes from the original idea, that a private (catholic) school environment offers students an opportunity to learn about their faith in a christian atmosphere. it sounds awesome on paper, but really private schools are not teeming with good christian kids eager to learn about their faith. ive seen the SAME problems that occur at public schools happen at catholic schools (drugs, alcohol, sex and smoking), and while the smaller environment can be nurturing to some students, i really dont beleive that catholic school breeds 'better' or more well-rounded kids.

my opinion is probably VERY biased since i have been attending catholic schools for the majority of my education (and hated every minute of it) but ive had many years to weigh the issue
TIM:
woohoo! public school baby!!! partay! we are gonna rock their sawks!

 

I attend a private school and believe that privates schools give greater opputunities to their students than ones at a state school. My opinin is based on what I have observed in my experience from my own education and that of people, whom I know.

Private school teachers as a whole are likely to be better trained than teachers from public schools. I base this on the believe that most people want to be payed well for the job they do. Thus the better qualfied teachers are likely to decide to teach at a private school and receive the greater income.

Though not always true, but likely in most cases, is that private school children will be more focused in their work. I am not saying that they will behave better, but they will try harder to do well in exams not only to show their parents that the money is not being wasted, but to also live up to the exctation that the school has for them.

Private schools due to having more equipment will have the more advanced sporting facilities. This will no doubt mean that the sporting abilites of students, who attend the school will have a higher chance of blossoming. Another interesting fact is that when playing fellow private schools at a sport there is a stronger team spirit than public schools. The private school teams more often than not keep up their effort till the very end of the match whilst public schools will often give up at halftime if they believe they cannot win.

Then there is the fact that the aim of a private school is not to only make their children pass the exams, but to develope them fully as a person. This leads to such things as community service being part of the a childs schedule. There are also things such compulsory participation in teams sports to encourage the sense of duty.

I fail to see the reasons why a public school woul be viewed as superior to that of an private school.

 

I sort of agree; I wouldn't have traded my edumacation at a Private school for anything. However, to be fair I was an outsider of sorts at school (because I played soccer and not rugby union!) and I learnt alot about the insular nature of these insitutions and the prejudices they perpetuate. However, this is only minor, and I'm proud of the fact I went to one of the better schools in not only NSW but Australia.

E_S

 

I can speak from experience when comparing public and 'catholic' schools. Although not the same thing as private, catholic schools provide basically the same education as public schools, unless the public school is pretty bad. I have been to 4 different catholic elementary schools and 2 different public elemantry schools as well as a catholic high school and a public high school. I can honestly say that there is NO DIFFERENCE in the quality of education and if private schools are better then they can't be too much better.

I believe that kids perform better in catholic and private schools because of their upbringing and surroundings and NOT because of the schools themselves.

Allow me to use a camparable example to give my point. Every couple of years there seems to be a "study" released, which finds that children who eat breakfast perform better in school then those children who do not. The assumption is that the actual event of eating breakfast is what causes them to perform better, but in reality the parents who have the time and/or care enough to make their children breakfast are also the same parents who have the time and/or care enough to make sure their children get their homework done, study for a test, finish projects, etc.

Think of the 'breakfast' as the school and there you have it.

 

i went to private school through 12th grade and since it was a small school the choice of classes was very limited, but my younger sister is going to a diff. private school and is getting a very good education. private or public school it depends on the school.

 

It does depend on the school. I've seen bad public schools; schools I hope I never set foot in. But there are also some bad private schools.

There may be more students who do fare badly in public school because their parents don't care about them or their education. Private schools do cost money so only the rich or those who really feel their kids need what the private school has and public doesn't will go to private school.

But I'm repeating everyone. Tada!

 

I don't understand what people mean when they "favor" public over private or vice versa. Do they mean that they would rather go to one than the other?

If so, IMO this is a somewhat frivolous debate. Everyone's opinions differ, and arguing over which is better is like arguing over vanilla vs. chocolate ice cream. But I think it's safe to say that most people would agree that the "best" private school is better than the "best" public school in terms of comprehensiveness of curriculum, quality of teachers, and facilities. And that's only to be expected: The government only has so much cash to divvy up amongst thousands of public schools.

 

But I think it's safe to say that most people would agree that the "best" private school is better than the "best" public school in terms of comprehensiveness of curriculum

And the worst public schools are probably worse then the worst private schools, however, you are talking about extremes. The 90% or so of schools that fall in between are what I am talking about. In terms of quality of education, an average public provides the same thing as an average private school, but stats might not show that because the kids who go to a private school are probably going to go better regardless while many kids who go to a public school are going to do worse regardless, based on factors like their family situations and financial situations, as well as possible cultural influence.

Also, I do not think that the quality of teachers are better in either case. With the exception of the extremes, most of the teachers in private and public schools probably make about the same, and it wouldn't surprise me if the public school teachers actually make more. Facts may prove me wrong however, as I am just guessing.

 

well, education does, of course, very with school. but ive been to 5 different catholic schools, in different states (ive moved around alot) and my observations remain generally the same.
the teachers ARE trained better, and they have less students, which provides an opportunity for teacher/student relationships to form. this is one of the best advantages going to private schools. the sporting facilities were indeed more expensive, however much smaller than public schools, and the emphasis placed on male sports overshadowed female sports and almost every other activity that took place at the school.
of course, this bias was definately not placed witht he same emphasis at every school i went to, but it was an overall trend i saw.
i dont see how the environment overall, besides teacher/student relationships, is 'better' than that of a public environment. the same 'problem' areas are there, but at a lower scale (and the parents could pay the principle off to have their kid stay instead of being expelled).

referring to the cereal analogy, i beleive that if you have somewhat caring and marginally involved parents, you will do just fine in a public or private environment, and i see no real favor (besides my personal OPINION) of either of the 2. they seem just about equal to me.

 

And the worst public schools are probably worse then the worst private schools, however, you are talking about extremes. The 90% or so of schools that fall in between are what I am talking about. In terms of quality of education, an average public provides the same thing as an average private school, but stats might not show that because the kids who go to a private school are probably going to go better regardless while many kids who go to a public school are going to do worse regardless, based on factors like their family situations and financial situations, as well as possible cultural influence.

Perhaps. I'm not an expert on this topic, but I did go to both private and public schools and I know that a third-grader at the private school I went to learns a lot more (or, at least, learns much more advanced material) than one at my local public school. And my local public school was ranked pretty high by the state.

Also, I do not think that the quality of teachers are better in either case. With the exception of the extremes, most of the teachers in private and public schools probably make about the same, and it wouldn't surprise me if the public school teachers actually make more. Facts may prove me wrong however, as I am just guessing.

Actually, I think the tests for private school teacher candidates are more difficult than those for public school teacher candidates.

 

I would have to agree that it depends on the school. Some public schools are really good, and some private schools suck out loud. I don't think there is a way to say one os better than the other, across the board. And as far as teachers go, it would again depend on the teacher. Some are good, some are bad. But as far as third graders in a private school learning more advanced stuff, that would be one reason to keep my kids out of private schools. I want them to have and enjoy the opportunity to be kids before they have to learn too much. In third grade most children are how old, 8, 9? They should be spending the vast majority of their thime PLAYING, not studying calculus.

 

I attended Montessori school in Europe through 4th grade. Montessori would be considered private here, but there pretty much all schools are funded by the government.

When my family and I moved to the US, we moved to a neighbordhood in Chicago that wasn't very good to say the least. My parents were unable to afford private school, so my mom decided to homeschool us. I have since visited the public school we would have gone to and made friends with people who attended the school. I'm very glad my parents did not send me there.

Both private and public schools have their problems. Private schools do tend to have a better record on education (in the area I'm in anyways). But private school kids tend to be more stuck up and have just as many drug and alcohol problems as public school kids.

When I have kids, it will all depend on the schools available. If there are good public schools, I see no harm in sending them there. If there are good, decently affordable private schools, I see no harm in sending them there either. Nor do I see any harm in homeschooling them should I choose to. But it will depend on the school, family, and individual child.

For instance, if my child has learning disabilities, he may do better in a special program, or he may do worse. I would definitely consider homeschooling then depending on the handicap and the child.

But more than anything, it's parental involvement that will help kids academically and socially regardless of what type of school they go to. And if a kid isn't learning and isn't happy, it's time to consider another school.

 

Just to through something into this discussion, most private schools do not require teachers to have teaching degrees as ALL public schools do.

Take this as you will. Some of you will think this a bad thing; some will think it a good thing.

~ DS5

 

Darthseti that is certainly not the case in England. Private school teachers usuallly all attend the best english univeristies such as Oxford. There are also very few private schools in England that are catholic. There are many catholic schools, but there is a big difference between these and private schools.



Secondly if private schools were not genrally better than their surrounding school, then why would parents give up a great portion of their salary for a education that could be gotten free. Anyway the top schools in any area of England is either private or a government maintained school.

Thirdly private school teachers are payed higher than state schools. This fact is not really debatable in England. Only the top government maintained schools would match that of private school teacher. In London a private school teacher is likely to get around £6,000 more than a public school teacher.

 

DarthSetti - that certainly isn't the case here in Australia too.

I went to one of the best private schools in Queensland (and one of the best girls' schools in Australia). It was harder and some of the teachers were better then the local public school (some were infinitely worse...but such is the luck of the draw). I, honestly, think it depends on the school and the overall attitudes of both the student body, parents and teachers. Whether or not your parents are shelling out money for something, if your attitute and the attitudes of your teachers was bad then you probably won't do well.


As for the breakfast thing, it is proven. In Australia they've implemented school breakfast programs in low income areas. Basically the kids are given breakfast at school (which they would not get otherwise). They did notice a significant improvement in their work and studying abilities. You need that morning food to get your body and brain started for the day.


Kithera

 

Perhaps England and Australia have different programs for their private schools, but I know in America that isn't the case in many of the private schools. At least half of my teachers did not have teaching degrees. The reason for this is, certainly, because private schools are not monitored through the government but independent accreditation associations that keep tabs on most of the private schools, though, granted, there are some that are not accredited.

Although, I don't know if you understood exactly what I was saying. I was not saying that the private school teachers weren't as educated as the public school teachers, I was saying they weren't required to carry the same credentials. Many of my teachers have had Masters or Ph.Ds in their respective fields along with years of hands-on, out of school, experience which helps them greatly in teaching. They simply did not have degrees in the field of teaching.

~ DS5

 

At least half of my teachers did not have teaching degrees.

Hmmm, I've never heard that. Do you have an article or anything anywhere?

It sounds plausible that there aren't as strict requirements, but half doesn't quite sound true. I'd love to know more.

 

Here's the US Department of Labor Job Statistics on Teaching: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm

Also, a short clip from it:

All 50 States and the District of Columbia require public school teachers to be licensed. Licensure is not required for teachers in private schools. Usually licensure is granted by the State board of education or a licensure advisory committee. Teachers may be licensed to teach the early childhood grades (usually nursery school through grade 3); the elementary grades (grades 1 through 6 or 8); the middle grades (grades 5 through 8); a secondary education subject area (usually grades 7 through 12); or a special subject, such as reading or music (usually grades kindergarten through 12). (Emphasis added)

If you notice the bottom of the article notes: Private school teachers generally earn less than public school teachers. I know that this is more often true. The private school I attended had a competing public school no less than a mile away. One of the my friends, who happened to be a teacher at my school, told me that she was often tempted to work at the public school so she could get a bit more money, but she always decided to stay because of the atmosphere of the private school.

I know, off the top of my head, my 7th grade Science, Art, and Language Arts teachers weren't licensed teachers but had significant degrees in their areas of teaching(usually a Master's degree or a lot of experience in the subject).

One of the best teachers I've ever had was my 9th grade Bio teacher who had a Master's in Biology and around 12 years experience in a pharmaceutical development agency. Just because she wasn't licensed doesn't mean she wasn't one of the best teachers in the school, though.

~ DS5