4 ms·

Public education is good in the areas where the upper middle class live. Old Greenwich, Cos Cob, and Riverside have great public schools because that's where a

Public education is good in the areas where the upper middle class live. Old Greenwich, Cos Cob, and Riverside have great public schools because that's where all the IT professionals, quants, and middle managers move to raise their families. Those districts have access to many adults with an interest and ability to participate in the school community, and so the district ends up with a lot of extra resources. But the hedge fund upper management send their kids to Brunswick School, Sacred Heart, and the like, and the district on the super rich and the poorer, primarily-Hispanic sides of town, has a poorer reputation.

virgilp 9y ago
The correlation is there, but I'm not convinced about causality. I know people pay good money to buy properties near a good public school... so, I suspect it's not that "public schools are great where upper middle class live", but that upper middle class moved where great public schools are.
- philipov 9y ago
  I think it's a feedback loop.
- ghaff 9y ago
  And they moved to where there are many other upper middle class families who are very involved in their children's education. As a result, you see schools with good metrics on standardized tests and the like even though the per pupil spend is not uncommonly less than that in urban schools with poorer metrics.
- PeterisP 9y ago
  Possibly, but in any case the problem isn't that public schools are flawed as a concept, but rather that some of USA public schools are bad. If many of these schools run on the same set of general principles and processes (although often with more funding) but work, the problem is not with the concept or goal but rather with the particular (some) implementations, some of the managers, or (mis)allocation of resources.
- lozenge 9y ago
  Public school funding in the US is probably the most inequitable in the developed world. Not only does each state decide its funding and taxes, but smaller local areas do too. High home values => high property taxes => more school funding.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  It's a loop. In many areas, schools are funded by property taxes, so higher property value leads to more funding for the school, which leads to perception of better school, which drives more people to want to live there, which produces higher property values, which...
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    That doesn't fully explain it though. Many of the worst schools also have some of the most funding per student.
sxg 9y ago
That correlation seems to exist, but that doesn't mean public education can't be good in economically challenged regions. I went to public school from grade 4–12 in West Virginia (ranked 49th out of 50 states by GDP/capita), and most of our graduating classes of ~250 had 10–20 students get into Ivy league or top 20 universities. Based on my experience in high school, the opportunities for a good education were there, but not every student took advantage of them (or was able to take advantage of them). While the public school system has its flaws, the problems with education in the US are multi-factorial. We could do better by having more teachers and funding for schools and modifying our system for educating kids, but we'll hit a ceiling unless we also improve the quality of family life for students at home as well as the US' cultural attitudes towards education.
SamReidHughes 9y ago
Districts like that don't get "extra resources" or any material benefit to kids' education from parental participation. The kids are spending all day sitting in classrooms with public school teachers just like any other district.

virgilp 9y ago

The correlation is there, but I'm not convinced about causality. I know people pay good money to buy properties near a good public school... so, I suspect it's not that "public schools are great where upper middle class live", but that upper middle class moved where great public schools are.

philipov 9y ago
I think it's a feedback loop.
ghaff 9y ago
And they moved to where there are many other upper middle class families who are very involved in their children's education. As a result, you see schools with good metrics on standardized tests and the like even though the per pupil spend is not uncommonly less than that in urban schools with poorer metrics.
PeterisP 9y ago
Possibly, but in any case the problem isn't that public schools are flawed as a concept, but rather that some of USA public schools are bad. If many of these schools run on the same set of general principles and processes (although often with more funding) but work, the problem is not with the concept or goal but rather with the particular (some) implementations, some of the managers, or (mis)allocation of resources.
lozenge 9y ago
Public school funding in the US is probably the most inequitable in the developed world. Not only does each state decide its funding and taxes, but smaller local areas do too. High home values => high property taxes => more school funding.
ubernostrum 9y ago
It's a loop. In many areas, schools are funded by property taxes, so higher property value leads to more funding for the school, which leads to perception of better school, which drives more people to want to live there, which produces higher property values, which...
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  That doesn't fully explain it though. Many of the worst schools also have some of the most funding per student.

sxg 9y ago

That correlation seems to exist, but that doesn't mean public education can't be good in economically challenged regions. I went to public school from grade 4–12 in West Virginia (ranked 49th out of 50 states by GDP/capita), and most of our graduating classes of ~250 had 10–20 students get into Ivy league or top 20 universities. Based on my experience in high school, the opportunities for a good education were there, but not every student took advantage of them (or was able to take advantage of them). While the public school system has its flaws, the problems with education in the US are multi-factorial. We could do better by having more teachers and funding for schools and modifying our system for educating kids, but we'll hit a ceiling unless we also improve the quality of family life for students at home as well as the US' cultural attitudes towards education.

SamReidHughes 9y ago

Districts like that don't get "extra resources" or any material benefit to kids' education from parental participation. The kids are spending all day sitting in classrooms with public school teachers just like any other district.