are private schools superior to public? for any specific population?

[ulysses]

If so, how and why?

[rwheeler31]

1. no

[BrklynLiberal]

2. They are superior for the children of rich people who would fail in any other school..

but since the parents are paying a fortune, the kids will pass..

[pnwmom]

68. Sounds like sour grapes.

My daughter would have been among the top of the class at any school (she's in graduate school in engineering now). Unfortunately, the public school couldn't provide for her needs in advanced math, and the private school could.

[Contrary1]

72. Just the opposite for our daughter...

It was the private school that didn't recognize she needed to be challenged. Our daughter was miserable, and I couldn't figure out why. I took her report card, and some of her tests/papers back to the public school she had attended for kindergarten, to get the opinion of the teacher.

Her former teacher told me that she had been working at 2nd and 3rd grade level 12 months earlier.

I enrolled her back at the public school for 2nd grade. The following year she was placed in a gifted class that included 4th and 5th graders. Best thing I could have done.

[pnwmom]

75. That's why I said, in another post here, that it all depends on the individual

schools -- and, of course, the particular child. There are excellent public schools and private schools. And mediocre public and private, too.

My siblings and I went to three different high schools, because we all had different needs. And each of my three has followed a different path, too.

[KamaAina]

3. Depends.

Over the years, as a "special needs" student, I was in good public schools, crappy public schools, good private schools, and crappy private schools.

edit: I iz a exzelent speler! :dunce:

[MissB]

4. In general, no.

I can think of exactly two private schools in my town that I would plunk my kids down in if I had the $$. One is secular, one is religious. The religious school is a math/science geek's best bet for success (locally speaking). Despite the fact that there is an element of religion to it, their high school kids are doing experiemental work beyond what many college students do. Very impressive.

[Stevenmarc]

78. It depends on where you live.

There's no simple answer to the question, here in the NYC area we have some really great public schools along with some that aren't so hot, the same goes for private schools. I can say that if you want your child to have a much better than average shot at an Ivy League school the right private school does provide an advantage.

[bluestateguy]

5. In many cases yes

Improving public schools takes time, perhaps many years. If I am a parent with school age children, I may not have the luxury of waiting that long. If my only choice is a terrible public school in my neighborhood (or close to my neighborhood), or a private school, then I have to do what is best for my child, and let somebody else worry about the political correctness.

Having said all that, I reject government funding of any private school through "voucher" schemes. That would make things worse for public schools.

[ulysses]

9. question still stands. is that private really any better?

[bluestateguy]

13. Perhaps

Unless you give an example of a specific school, then I can only say so much.

But if the private school is clean, safe, with up to date technology and textbooks, innovative approaches to learning, small class sizes, excellent and motivated teachers and discipline, such that bad behaving kids can be promptly punished or removed without layers upon layers of bureaucracy, then yes that private school is on the whole better than the public school----if the public school does not provide these things.

[ulysses]

18. fair point, but the debate doesn't get into specifics like those,

so we won't do so here.

Public vs. Private. At that level. Sorry.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

20. If you are looking for a school to match a particular student

and you find it, then the answer is yes. My example would be my alma mater, University High School, where the emphasis was on academics. Everyone that didn't wash out was assured of college admittance, and several of my classmates had Ivy League schools fighting over giving them scholarships. The training was so rigorous that I aced most of my college career, and was even chosen, as a freshman, to tutor other students in history.

I've no doubt I would have gotten a good education in public high school, but it wouldn't have been as academically challenging and I wouldn't have had access to university facilities, such as the library.

[ulysses]

27. did the availability of the program you attended

improve the local public school?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

30. I think it did

My mother worked for the public school district, and they were always getting special grants to have extra classes that were being tried out by the university in the elementary schools--that's how I learned German in third grade and took astronomy in sixth.

[ulysses]

36. through cooperation? not competition?

!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

77. How 'bout that

Now you know how I became a socialist. :)

[Peregrine]

6. People don't realize that privates schools are not created equal

They range from schools in church basements packing in multiple grades into one or two rooms using teachers without any college to the expensive prep schools.

Probably the small church based schools constitute most of the private schools.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Depends if you belong to a SMALL ethnic community wishing to preserve

history and culture, then that may be a way to go, and why we have small community schools for kids from different communities in this country as well.

I went to a PRIVATE Jewish school in Mexico... no way that the public school would have done Hebrew as a second language.

That said, some private schools are VERY GOOD, most are average, and a few are terrible

Public schools, you could say the same, and partly that has to do with funding

Schools in well to do areas tend to be better than run down inner city schools... (and that tends to be a rule regardless of country)

That said, I AM a believer in the public system, but it needs massive reforms as well as funding... my pet peeve... we really don't have a national system, so if kids move from one city to the next... it is traumatic for more than just changing classrooms

[CoffeeCat]

8. Private schools are superior...

...if you want to get wasted on really expensive weed and Chivas while you're friends' parents
are in Barbados every other weekend.

Good times. Good times.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

23. Or if you wish to learn early how to apply yourself and work hard

Not all private schools are havens for rich kids getting high. Some are day schools that train people and give them the self-discipline for life.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. Depends-- a good private school has...

excellent instructors, small class sizes, a motivated student body, a lot of resources, parental prticipation, and can throw the disrupters out.

A bad public school has large class sizes, an unmotivated student body and teaching staff, little parental involvement, few resources, and has to take the kids the private schools throw out.

But, not all private schools are that good, and few public schools are really that bad.

(Popular wisdom has it that the worst of the public schools are in bad neighborhoods in impoverished cities, but that's probably not entirely true.)

[ulysses]

11. you touched the third rail.

and can throw the disrupters out.

You're not supposed to remind anyone that the privates can do that. It's sort of the dark secret.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

25. Never has been a dark secret

Mom was a teacher, and she would talk about that with anyone who would argue that public schools were worse than private ones. She taught special education, mostly those who could be disrupters.

[Hangingon]

17. I think you have it.

It depends on where you are and what school you child can get into. If the public schools are good, your child will do well - assuming you are a good, active parent and stay involved. Not all private schools are equal. If the public schools are not well run and do not have a record of academic success, look for a good private school. They cost money, but good ones value active engaged parents.

[depakid]

12. Not every child is cut out for public schools

As counterintuitive as it may seem, TAG kids in particular are often poorly served, and have significantly lower high school completion rates- and higher levels of drug and alcohol abuse than others in their cohorts.

Private or "alternative" schools- with more flexible curriculas and pedagogies better suit their academic and emotional needs.

Of course, it would be great if TAG programs in public schools recieved appropriate funding, staffing and support- but the unfortunate reality is that in most places, that's not the case.

[ulysses]

16. what's the availability of private school placement for those kids like?

[depakid]

34. Not sure how it works as to scholarships in Oregon- there are some available

and the public schools are expressly supposed to fund TAG programs by law- though they never do.

In New South Wales, there are TAG classes and/or certain primary schools that kids are referred to (nominated by) teachers or school officals. At year 6, there are exams for what are known as selective schools. Any kid can sit for them and they're quite competitive.

The private schools also seek out the more gifted kids- as they want to show the best possible results on HSC's (roughly equivalent to SAT's and ACT's).

Even if they have to cheat!

See, e.g. Private schools accused of rorting HSC

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/private-schools-accused-of-rorting-hsc/2008/12/28/1230399045680.html

(You'll enjoy the article, btw)

Not certain how recruitment or scholarships work- though unlike America, Australia does provide private schools with some public funding (this was brought in under Howard- and it's not without controversy).

[jazzjunkysue]

14. Public school teacher here: I say, mostly, public are better.

But of course, there are really poor city public schools and really strong richer than rich private.

But unless you're super smart and rich, you're usually better off in public. Public can offer fully stocked high school science labs, all the extras like several foreign languages and full music programs.

Usually, private schools have few choices and no extras, little music, and sports are lop-sided. If a school is known for it's baseball, that will get most of the funding to the exclusion of everything else.

I mean, what private school can outfit a complete gymnastics gym? A pool? Musical theater? Very very few.

Also, private schools usually ask special needs students to either leave or just fix their grades. I've known students who were really behind in their rich private schools, who needed to be rescued by good old fashioned public schools.

So, look into your particular needs and then investigate a private school for that. And expect their results to be less impressive than their promises.

[elleng]

33. FUNNY! My experience is just the opposite to yours!

Public schools DON'T have the choices you describe, but did in the past! but maybe its an urban/suburban distinction!

[XemaSab]

71. I think High School vs. Elementary School

is an important distinction.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

15. No and yes

It really depends on the nature of the school and the involvement of the parents. I've seen "private" schools run by high school graduates who promised the moon to parents with developmentally delayed kids--needless to say, the promises were not based on any fact--luckily the parents caught on and got the kid back to public school before he got too far behind. I also know of private schools that were excellent--I went to one, a university lab school, for grades 7-12. There was an entrance exam to get in and the teachers all had, at the very least, Master's degrees. Parents were expected to be involved in making sure we worked our tails off, and goof-offs were quickly flunked out and sent back to public school.

[NewJeffCT]

19. It depends on the school

I think public schools are generally a bit better overall, but there are huge variances in so many places that you can't really be specific in one way or another.

My town has outstanding public schools, but is also home to an excellent (and very expensive) private school, and the next town over has a very famous and very well-regarded private school for girls (alums include Jackie Kennedy, Glorida Vanderbilt and some of the Bush women)

However, my cousins grew up in a town with mediocre (at best) public schools, and going to the private Catholic school in town would have been a better option educationally for them - if they had the money.

[ulysses]

21. we don't get to deliberate that in the public sphere.

It's grossly approached, but there you have it. Public or Private. No diddling per school.

[Trillo]

22. My experience in private schools for the few years I attended them was

that other children weren't as mean: that meant there was much less bullying.

It's too bad the administrators were calculating liars at one of them, but I suppose that is what is required for success in any hierarchical system. It sure seems to be true.

[seabeyond]

24. from personal experience and where i live.... NO. i put kids in private for two reasons

academics and my first son is a nerd type boy. i had heard enough about how bad academically public schools are, we had tak tests.... texas, bush started them here, and i wasn't going to put son in environment of bullying i had heard so much of.

this was the best academically in town. and christian. pre k to 4th grade.

about 2003 i started seeing a difference in behaviors of the group. bushco had riled up the christians to such a frothing hate along with the movie passion. so out the window went the christian environment.

my son was beyond the school academically and i was hearing the public math was ahead of what my son was doing.

pulled the boys out thanksgiving 2004. we have been in public schools four and half years. not nearly the bullying, the schools kids have gone to adm and teachers have a real control and handle on ALL the kids.

and academically they are way beyond this private school. i still have connections and have been able to watch the differences

further, they have more opportunity in public than the do in private in diversity in learning and various opportunities.

[elleng]

26. Yes, for every population.

Didn't HAVE to be this way, but we've let public education deteriorate.

I attended public schools through college. Years ago, its my impression that there wasn't the same level of 'political' interference in day to day things at schools. My Brooklyn early years were excellent, Long Island middle and high school years quite good, college OK.

NOW there are so many hands on/in what goes on, and how, I don't think its likely/possible for a good/excellent public school system to continue in such a way. LOTS more to say.

[ulysses]

28. do say, please.

[seabeyond]

53. respectively....i dont agree. for my area anyway. i have had kids in both. n/t

[Still Sensible]

29. Really varies widely based on my wife's experience

My wife has taught at both--she currently teaches junior high social studies in a strong public district. I think a lot depends on the resources and the philosophy from school to school.

She has noted that there are three areas where private schools have an advantage as far as teachers are concerned, which indirectly extends to a better environment for student learning. First, there tends to be more consistent parent involvement; Second, and in some respect due in part to number one, there are less discipline problems; and third, there is more flexibility that allows dealing with subjects in a little more depth and allowing for more critical thinking.

Generally speaking, the public schools she has taught in tend to have more resources than the private schools in the same market and feature more diversity. She says there are good teachers to be found in both situations, but more of them in public schools, where there are also more administrators... which is sometimes a good thing and sometimes not.

Like most good public school teachers, she laments much about NCLB and how there is more "teaching to the test" and less teaching critical thinking.

She realizes she is fortunate to teach in one of the strongest public school districts in our state. Parent involvement in her current situation is nearly as strong as when she taught in a private school. As a sponsor of NJHS at her school, she interacts with teachers across the state and says there are incredible differences from district to district in parental support, overall quality and available resources.

Obviously, there are many other factors--particularly relative to public schools--that could be discussed. Those noted here are the ones she has most often talked about.

[ulysses]

32. all good points, but again,

this isn't how the public debate has been framed. Public vs. Private, good or bad.

[elleng]

39. Thats a major problem!

'Framing the debate' on education, in the political forum, will naturally 'dumb down' the debate, (my handy characterization) and result in dumbed-down answers and policies.

[ulysses]

40. indeed it is!

And it's ever with us. We need to keep our eyes open.

[Still Sensible]

42. As opposed to looking at it in black and white

what I tried to do is provide an answer that was nuanced as any realistic assessment would probably need to be.

That said, because of the bureaucratic and discipline issues, I think my wife would say it was easier teaching in a private school. As for the broadest educational experience for students, she would probably say public schools, especially in a strong district like the one she is in now.

I didn't even go into the religious aspect. She taught at a catholic K-8 school. The religion was not pervasive or intrusive and there were never any demands placed on her because it was a catholic school. That surprised her, but may or may not be the way it is in other catholic schools.

Based on our experience, there are positives and negatives for each.

[ulysses]

43. I'm not trying to be an ass,

just attempting to keep the discussion within the frame known by the public. Your points are well taken, but they're minor to most folks. Should they be?

[Still Sensible]

47. I think in broad strokes they should be central to the debate

if not those points, what should be?

[ulysses]

48. no disagreement here.

[Libertyfirst]

31. Dumb question with qualifications. No rational answer. n/t

[ulysses]

35. it seems fairly straightforward to me.

Where do you stand?

[sandnsea]

37. Not because it's private

Rather because it's properly staffed and funded, which is going to go a long way to providing a better education. And the troublemakers can be kicked out more easily, and I do believe rich parents have just as many bratty kids as poor ones, despite the claims to the contrary. I just think they have more money so they have more options to deal with them.

[ulysses]

41. shhh! you can't say that!

Besides, everyone knows that money has nothing whatsoever to do with educational quality. :silly:

[Warpy]

38. Some prep schools are superior

and they're the ones with the stringent entrance requirements. Legacies like Stupid do still get in, but by and large, the education is superior for any student who has the brains and will to take advantage of it. Teachers are often college level and masters degrees are a minimum requirement for most subjects.

Other private schools, especially the ones that came about as a way for bigots to take their kids out of integrated schools, aren't so great. Entrance requirements are lax and teachers often uncertified.

Careful checking into average SAT scores and subsequent university graduation are absolutely necessary if you can't come up with the $41,000 or so a year for Choate.

[ZombieHorde]

44. In Japan, the public schools are considered to be the best.

[AngryAmish]

45. In general, yes

You get to get rid of troublemakers.

Plus wealthier people tend to send their kids to private schools. Peer group interaction have a great deal to do with why kids excel or get into trouble. Wealthier kids tend to be smarter and get into less trouble. So you want your kid hanging around with them since they get into less trouble.

[ulysses]

46. "You get to get rid of troublemakers." Thank you!

I see a pattern here.

[Still Sensible]

49. While that is absolutely true,

what is also true is that you start out with less "troublemakers" to begin with. And with parents paying for it, and typically stronger parent involvement, there are less incidents to deal with.

Another private vs public difference is special needs. I know some private schools do deal with and actually offer special needs programs. But special needs students are overwhelmingly a public schools issue.

[ulysses]

54. ok.

And with parents paying for it, and typically stronger parent involvement, there are less incidents to deal with.

What you're really saying is that the really poor (i.e. socially maladjusted) kids don't get into private schools.

But special needs students are overwhelmingly a public schools issue.

Why is that?

[Still Sensible]

57. Look what kind of fight are you trying to pick?

Is there a class thing in the public vs private debate, of course there is.

Private schools that have programs for special needs kids welcome them. Most have no such programs.

In most cases the law requires public schools to have special needs programs, so that is the place where those issues are typically addressed.

One of the biggest differences is that there are far more administrators in public schools. That is primarily because teachers are generally poorly paid relative to the work they do. More and more administrator jobs are created because it is one of the few ways public schools can provide as a means for teachers to advance their careers.

NCLB has some noble goals. Personally, I disagree with much of the proscribed methods of NCLB because "teaching to tests" discourages critical thinking. Most already realize NCLB has been desperately underfunded as well.

Why don't you just spit out exactly what you are trying to get at and I am glad those of us posting here will be glad to give you our opinions.

[ulysses]

58. the fight's already been picked. I'm just engaging.

I guess, if you want a short cut, it's this: do we want to educate *all* children or not?

[Still Sensible]

59. Of course we do

and an incredible amount of resource is directed toward that end in school districts throughout the country. What do you have in mind and how does the public versus private question effect that?

[ulysses]

60. why are special needs a public school issue?

[buzzard]

63. I would say because most private schools don't have to deal with that issue if they choose not to

simple as that.

[ulysses]

64. then how valid is the comparison between public and private?

Secondary question: should privates that choose not to deal with the issue accept public money?

[buzzard]

69. I don't think one can compare public vs private school in general it depends on what parameters you

are looking at and the particular school in question. I also do not think private schools should accept public money nor be offered it, ideally a publicly funded school would be the best offering all students the same quality of education. I will think on this more as I am now off to bed. I also need to think more on why I sent my middle son to private school he was one of those who would qualify as disruptive, a gifted kid but bored and disinterested in school, a teachers nightmare. He has just finished his first semester at University and has received his first marks so far they are above 90 but in public school he was failing, I don't know how to evaluate this honestly, I am just happy that he seems to have found his way.

[XemaSab]

73. Rich kids get into trouble

but their parents get them out of it.

As a kid in Oakland, I saw my poor classmates get into trouble that they couldn't get out of, and I was always careful to keep my nose clean.

I would balk at judging which social class gets into the most trouble.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

50. The best answer is it depends on which ones

What follows are my generalizations:

Public schools, esp in CA are dropping fast. Core subjects and activities are really hurting. Its not just NCLB its overall funding. Some districts are doing better than that, but not many. Court mandated funding parity schemes across districts, though well intentioned, have also hurt overall performance in many estimations.

Private schools are a mixed bag. Some are excellent and cost a fortune. Others are smaller and still effective. Your classic Catholic school is probably the best bang for the buck in private education today, if you can take the theology content. Not quite up to the big names, comparable with the better public schools, with more discipline and structure. The garage based private school are IMO child abuse.

What we did: We put our children through Punahou, same school that Obama went to. Hawaii public schools were in a mess (still are to some extent), the Felix case was making it worse. Punahou is really expensive, unless you teach there or your kids get scholarships. We did the former. The wages are seriously low for Hawaii, but we got by. We did it with the agreement of our kids. After they all graduated, we moved to CA where we could get decent retirements and live something other than paycheck to paycheck. They were some great years as a family, at times I miss them terribly.

[Smarmie Doofus]

51. Depends. In urban areas there's no comparison.

NYC public schools are so dysfunctional that everyone who can scrape up the money goes private. I imagine that that situation repeats itself in big cities around the country.


In the suburbs the dynamics are different. People don't pay all that money in property taxes so their kids can attend Hell-Hole High. They demand a better product and they get it.

[Scooter24]

52. It depends...

My local public and private schools are among the best in the nation so it's hard to draw a contrast. I went to a private day school in NYC and I felt that I walked out of there very prepared for the challenges ahead. I don't think I could have said the same thing if I was to come out of one of NYC's public schools.

Most people consider our local high school "private" because of the substantial costs involved to move here and the general exclusivity of the community. The parents and members of this community however take great pride in our schools, we donate money and our time, we fund-raise and hold benefits, we make sure that the student's succeed at all costs.

I look outside my immediate community and see failing public schools that seem to be getting worse. A school district that seems to be corrupted and wasteful.

So your question to me is are private schools superior to public schools? With a few exceptions, I would say yes.

[ulysses]

55. given your comments concerning the neighborhood and the cost of living there,

does anyone there ask why things seem to be so much worse outside the immediate district?

[Scooter24]

74. Oh I'm sure everyone is aware of the situation.

We are a 95% white/5% minority 0% Economically disadvantaged district whereas Dallas ISD is a 95% minority/5% white district 85% Economically disadvantaged district. Our ISD sits in the middle of Dallas.

Take Bush's new neighborhood just north of here in Preston Hollow. Preston Hollow is a very white, extremely wealthy neighborhood where the majority of the area's billionaires live. Preston Hollow, unlike my neighborhood, is zoned to the DISD. The DISD school's that are zoned to Preston Hollow have about an 80%-85% minority makeup whereas the community itself is probably 5% at most minority. The majority of students who live in Preston Hollow attend private schools, of which there are 12 in the area.

Hillcrest High School (DISD) serves Preston Hollow. It's TEA rating is "Academically Acceptable." Test scores are either below or just barely meeting state averages at the Grade 11 level. St. Marks school on the other hand boasts a 100% college acceptance and students with an mean test score of 31 ACT/2064 SAT for its graduates. Hillcrest had a average score of 20 from its students on the ACT.

"100% of St. Mark's students go on to a four year college or university. The most commonly attended colleges by 2006-2008 graduates were <4> University of Texas at Austin, Stanford University, Northwestern University, Vanderbilt University, University of Pennsylvania, Washington University in St. Louis, Georgetown University, University of Southern California, Southern Methodist University, Harvard University, University of Virginia, Baylor University, Dartmouth College, Emory University, Princeton University, Yale University, Furman University, Occidental College, and Rice University.

48% of the graduating class of 2008 were national merit commended or awarded scholars."

[Fearless]

56. I've been to both. Hell no.

I went to Catholic school for elementary and middle school. (K-8) I could've gone to the Catholic high school as well, but I didn't. First, it was far less funded and had outdated technology. (Rarely do they receive gov't grants for technology.) Likewise, at least in my case, teachers were attracted to the schools, which pay less than public schools, for purely ideological reasons. That is, religious indoctrination. Although, I have to admit, sex-ed was funny. I've also taught in a few public high schools. No comparison.

:P

NTF

[LeftyMom]

61. I would be reluctant to send my kid to either, which is why we homeschool

The only local school I would be at all happy about enrolling him in at this time is a small private school, fwiw.

[ulysses]

62. curious about why.

Gently so, though. I've learned to moderate my attitude toward progressive homeschoolers. :)

[LeftyMom]

65. Because he's a very advanced student, and his needs would not be met.

Generally I don't think that teaching 30 kids at the same pace meets anybody's needs (no matter who is paying for it) but he'd be unusually bored and miserable in a group of students near his age and socially out of place with a group near his academic level.

The only school around here we'd likely have any luck with is a Sudbury-type school, so he could work at his own pace and interact with people of all ages while pursuing his own interests. A more typical school environment would not meet his needs at this time or any time in the near future.

[pnwmom]

66. Depends on the schools involved. I'm sending my third to a private school because

the public schools here have been taken over by test taking mania (thanks a lot, NCLB). The district has moved from a philosophy emphasizing an individualized education to a one-size-fits all, cookie-cutter education.

My older children attended the same elementary school as the younger one did, and it was sickening to see the changes occur over the years, after the new superintendent and NCLB took over. Fortunately, we had other good options. The private school that my son attends recognizes that children learn differently and have different educational needs. And they have a student-teacher ratio that supports that.

[RiverStone]

67. Public schools do a better job of reflecting real life

I have worked for 20 years in the public school system, yet as a kid I went mostly to private "Montessori" type schools. Both my kiddos are public school attendees.

The short answer is in general, PS kids are far better for being exposed to the good, bad, and ugly that's out there. Kids need to deal with diversity and the hoops of life sooner or later. Whereas many private school kids have much better student to teacher ratio's and/or expensive curriculum - PS kids learn to work within very eclectic groups which necessitate adapting.

The elite class class can afford to send their kids to expensive/exclusive schools - but those kids are neither happier or wiser for it (or worse than PS kids either) - they may speak Japanese instead of Spanish - but my measure of success is being happy. Of course, there are exceptions and this is not absolute, but as a teacher/counselor in the system - I would never send my kids to a private school. Of course, this is IMO - I respect parents may disagree; it's based on my own personal/professional experience.

Good parenting is far, far more important than school no matter where the kid goes!

p.s. NCLB sucks for ALL schools!

[XemaSab]

70. Yes

I went to a private school for the first 5 years of my education, and it was a great school.

First of all, kids weren't allowed to be ignorant. Kids repeated grades if they didn't learn the material. Secondly, if you were bad you went to the principal's office.

Thirdly and finally, they tried to teach writing, literature, science, math, nature, and civics in a way that I have never seen any other school do.

On Friday... ALL DAY... we went to the park and learned about birds and trees, then we went back to the school, drank tea, and the teacher read Narnia aloud. ALL DAY.

The rest of the week was challenging enough that we could afford a day of educational fun.

I cannot imagine such a thing taking place in a public school. :shrug:

[conscious evolution]

76. I went to both

They were about the same.Public schools were a little better for science and math while the private schools had better religion classes.
I also went to private and public colleges.They were about the same.