9 ms·

One bad thing can be the purpose and or bias in a private school. There are very good ones. There are very bad ones too. Access to good private education tak

One bad thing can be the purpose and or bias in a private school. There are very good ones. There are very bad ones too. Access to good private education takes more money than the majority of Americans have. Charter schools often pop up, look sexy, and vary extremely widely. Again some good, a lot of "meh" and some bad. The idea behind robust public education is the majority would get a good education regardless of their economic position. I had pretty great public education, and I was poor in a backward town too. We have declined a shocking amount! It just so happens I can remember every year. Odd. But, useful to compare to my own kids education. We were in better shape economically, but the quality was spotty throughout. And it was stripped down. A move to more private, or no public is likely a downgrade for way too many people, IMHO.

jelliclesfarm 8y ago
Right. That’s why unions make it worse. With the passage of time, more students due to increasing population but also higher pension burden. This is like a tottering tower built on a semi solid foundation. It will topple because soon there is not enough money to educate but only to maintain those who have retired.(aka not productive in the economic system). It is highly irrational. I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities and the need for equality is actually making us accept lowest common denominator. Having classes on the basis of age is also problematic. I think children should be educated in groups with different age groups. Instead of curriculums, they can learn whatever they want and be guided to pursue what interests them most. The evaluations can be once in 3-5 years maybe? And they can streamed into groups according to their abilities. In a lot of ways, the pressure will be off kids and they can truly learn..to be the best in what interests them and where their abilities are their strengths.
- lazyasciiart 8y ago
  Your comment begins with "that's why" but I can't see any relationship between it and what you are responding to. Can you explain the connection?
  - jelliclesfarm 8y ago
    Sorry. That was wrt to the latest lausd strike that is going to begin. That news item is what triggered this thought process for me and why I started this thread. I should have mentioned it.
- yesenadam 8y ago
  public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities How do you figure that?
  - jelliclesfarm 8y ago
    I didn’t state that..I said that “I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities“ And I meant intellectual inequalities. Some skills need practice(music, for example)...others need an persistence and some others need aptitude. A public school in my district right now has to choose between building a swimming pool or pay teachers more wages to build up their last drawn salary which will be their lifetime pension when they retire as a defined benefit. All students lose because they never find out where they excel because they have to receive uniform education that is affordable to all after redistribution of resources.
    - yesenadam 8y ago
      So (you wonder if) everyone getting the same education is leading to inequalities? Sorry, I really don't follow.
      - jelliclesfarm 8y ago
        Yes. That’s exactly what I mean. Example: If one has an aptitude for grade 11 in the subject of mathematics and grade 3 for the subject of history...and one is assigned to grade 5 learning 5th grade math and 5th grade history, then it’s a complete waste of education. However(for the purpose of this thought experiment)...if one is in a class that has students from say..grade 5 to grade 12...and can learn whatever they want..then one can entirely skip history classes and focus only on math. Everyone learns what they want...instead of learning what someone else wants.
jelliclesfarm 8y ago
But with more private schools, wouldn’t it be more affordable especially for the middle class? Public schools should only be for those who can’t afford their children’s education. If one is wealthy one must pay more their kids education. I mean..if I am a multi millionaire, I am getting a fancy car and a nice house. Why can’t I pay more for my child’s education? Public education shouldn’t be tied to property tax. We will pay less tax with the option to educate our kids the way we see fit. I still don’t understand what charter and magnet schools are in this country. I will get around to it soon. Regardless, this system is failing. So if it fails, it must be fixed..no? How is the next step..but the first step is to admit that there is a problem, no?
- ddingus 8y ago
  What middle class? There is one, but it is small now. Something like half the nation makes 40k per year. That 40k has to do Housing Food Transport Health care Add paying private tuition? Most will end up in what remains of public education or any number of very mixed bag charter schools. So we will have thrown wrenches into what was pretty great public education for almost everyone, declare it isn't working (no surprise there), to achieve a market system that will deliver spotty education? The whole thing is a net loss, if you ask me. I would and never have opposed high end or specialized private education for those who can afford such things. Denying what is probably the majority of Americans a solid education to expand on that just does not seem to make sense. Worse, doing that is failure to invest in our own future. That spotty education will have a direct impact and already has. Funding public education can be done, and should be done. And when it is propely funded, educators are not larded down with too many mamdatory requirements, stripped of the agency needed to do it right, works well. Worked well enough to advance our nation very considerably, I should add. Couple that mess with essentially 4 decades of flat wages taking us from one family member being able to provide reasonably to both parents working full time plus, which shifts a lot of problems onto schools increasingly unable to deal with them, and it is no wonder the future looks grim. You say public schools should only be for those unable to afford it. Ok, that is rapidly becoming a majority of people. Which is it? People earn enough to invest in the young people who are our future and who will take care of us in our old age , or Make it a public investment, anyone is free to augment, given they have means. The fact is, public education only works well at scale. We either fund it and get the benefit and security that comes along with a well educated population, or we don't. This nation was built by people attending great public schools and colleges. The more we have stepped away from that, the less we have gained. And there is already inexcusable student debt for college. How much do we want to bet that same thing happens in a sea of private primary education schools all looking to make money first, educate second? Charters already do that with super inconsistent, meaning generally worse overall outcomes, now. Low odds on that one. And they will make money first no matter what. That is what business does. No blame, no shame just facts. Public education is about education, not making money. I have just not seen the benefit overall, just some people getting better for their money while a lot of others get a whole lot worse. And causing all of that so very wealthy people can get or do what they could just do anyway? Laughable. Seriously. Had I the means you brought up, trust me, educating my kids properly would be no problem, and it would be no problem while easily contributing my share to public education so my better educated kids grow into a competent, well educated, civic minded society they would likely be able to earn more than their share of wealth from. Nice problems to have compared to the growing mess now. Very nice problems.
earthicus 8y ago
> Access to good private education takes more money than the majority of Americans have. I went to a fairly traditional private school (cost: $8k/yr) and absolutely hated it, but still did well. Eventually my hatred turned into a complete mental breakdown, I refused to go anymore, and after a search transferred to a super fancy independent study school (cost: $15k/yr) where I got to meet one-on-one with my teachers, or in small classes of less than 5 students. This school cured my depression in a few months and developed my intellectual and artistic passions over the next couple of years. Several of my friends followed me there in the next year or two, with similar positive effects on their sanity. If only everyone had this opportunity! Alas, Seattle spends only $15k per student in their public schools :-( Here's the data for all 50 states as a whole [1]. > Charter schools often pop up, look sexy, and vary extremely widely. Again some good, a lot of "meh" and some bad. This is famously true of different public school districts as well. I'm not willing to discount anything that help move us away from the deranged format of traditional schools. [1] https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/public-education-costs-per-pupil-by-state-rankings/ https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/p...
- tmaly 8y ago
  Something must be wrong here, how can a super fancy school with 1:5 ratio cost 15k and the per-student cost of public school cost 15k?
  - jelliclesfarm 8y ago
    Pensions. Public school systems are unionized.
  - earthicus 8y ago
    The source i linked to gives a breakdown of how the public school money is spent in the second section, titled 'Where are schools spending their money?' You can see that Public schools have many legitimate expenses that private schools don't, along with bureaucratic overhead. However, the reason my school could get away with such a small ratio, even compared to other private schools that cost the same, is because it is an independent study school - I only went two days a week for a few hours a day. Imagine you have one teacher working for 10 hours and 10 students. If each student goes all 10 hours, your ratio is 1:10. If each student goes only 1 hour, your ratio is 1:1.

jelliclesfarm 8y ago

Right. That’s why unions make it worse. With the passage of time, more students due to increasing population but also higher pension burden. This is like a tottering tower built on a semi solid foundation. It will topple because soon there is not enough money to educate but only to maintain those who have retired.(aka not productive in the economic system). It is highly irrational. I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities and the need for equality is actually making us accept lowest common denominator. Having classes on the basis of age is also problematic. I think children should be educated in groups with different age groups. Instead of curriculums, they can learn whatever they want and be guided to pursue what interests them most. The evaluations can be once in 3-5 years maybe? And they can streamed into groups according to their abilities. In a lot of ways, the pressure will be off kids and they can truly learn..to be the best in what interests them and where their abilities are their strengths.

lazyasciiart 8y ago
Your comment begins with "that's why" but I can't see any relationship between it and what you are responding to. Can you explain the connection?
- jelliclesfarm 8y ago
  Sorry. That was wrt to the latest lausd strike that is going to begin. That news item is what triggered this thought process for me and why I started this thread. I should have mentioned it.
yesenadam 8y ago
public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities How do you figure that?
- jelliclesfarm 8y ago
  I didn’t state that..I said that “I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities“ And I meant intellectual inequalities. Some skills need practice(music, for example)...others need an persistence and some others need aptitude. A public school in my district right now has to choose between building a swimming pool or pay teachers more wages to build up their last drawn salary which will be their lifetime pension when they retire as a defined benefit. All students lose because they never find out where they excel because they have to receive uniform education that is affordable to all after redistribution of resources.
  - yesenadam 8y ago
    So (you wonder if) everyone getting the same education is leading to inequalities? Sorry, I really don't follow.
    - jelliclesfarm 8y ago
      Yes. That’s exactly what I mean. Example: If one has an aptitude for grade 11 in the subject of mathematics and grade 3 for the subject of history...and one is assigned to grade 5 learning 5th grade math and 5th grade history, then it’s a complete waste of education. However(for the purpose of this thought experiment)...if one is in a class that has students from say..grade 5 to grade 12...and can learn whatever they want..then one can entirely skip history classes and focus only on math. Everyone learns what they want...instead of learning what someone else wants.

jelliclesfarm 8y ago

But with more private schools, wouldn’t it be more affordable especially for the middle class? Public schools should only be for those who can’t afford their children’s education. If one is wealthy one must pay more their kids education. I mean..if I am a multi millionaire, I am getting a fancy car and a nice house. Why can’t I pay more for my child’s education? Public education shouldn’t be tied to property tax. We will pay less tax with the option to educate our kids the way we see fit. I still don’t understand what charter and magnet schools are in this country. I will get around to it soon. Regardless, this system is failing. So if it fails, it must be fixed..no? How is the next step..but the first step is to admit that there is a problem, no?

ddingus 8y ago
What middle class? There is one, but it is small now. Something like half the nation makes 40k per year. That 40k has to do Housing Food Transport Health care Add paying private tuition? Most will end up in what remains of public education or any number of very mixed bag charter schools. So we will have thrown wrenches into what was pretty great public education for almost everyone, declare it isn't working (no surprise there), to achieve a market system that will deliver spotty education? The whole thing is a net loss, if you ask me. I would and never have opposed high end or specialized private education for those who can afford such things. Denying what is probably the majority of Americans a solid education to expand on that just does not seem to make sense. Worse, doing that is failure to invest in our own future. That spotty education will have a direct impact and already has. Funding public education can be done, and should be done. And when it is propely funded, educators are not larded down with too many mamdatory requirements, stripped of the agency needed to do it right, works well. Worked well enough to advance our nation very considerably, I should add. Couple that mess with essentially 4 decades of flat wages taking us from one family member being able to provide reasonably to both parents working full time plus, which shifts a lot of problems onto schools increasingly unable to deal with them, and it is no wonder the future looks grim. You say public schools should only be for those unable to afford it. Ok, that is rapidly becoming a majority of people. Which is it? People earn enough to invest in the young people who are our future and who will take care of us in our old age , or Make it a public investment, anyone is free to augment, given they have means. The fact is, public education only works well at scale. We either fund it and get the benefit and security that comes along with a well educated population, or we don't. This nation was built by people attending great public schools and colleges. The more we have stepped away from that, the less we have gained. And there is already inexcusable student debt for college. How much do we want to bet that same thing happens in a sea of private primary education schools all looking to make money first, educate second? Charters already do that with super inconsistent, meaning generally worse overall outcomes, now. Low odds on that one. And they will make money first no matter what. That is what business does. No blame, no shame just facts. Public education is about education, not making money. I have just not seen the benefit overall, just some people getting better for their money while a lot of others get a whole lot worse. And causing all of that so very wealthy people can get or do what they could just do anyway? Laughable. Seriously. Had I the means you brought up, trust me, educating my kids properly would be no problem, and it would be no problem while easily contributing my share to public education so my better educated kids grow into a competent, well educated, civic minded society they would likely be able to earn more than their share of wealth from. Nice problems to have compared to the growing mess now. Very nice problems.

earthicus 8y ago

> Access to good private education takes more money than the majority of Americans have. I went to a fairly traditional private school (cost: $8k/yr) and absolutely hated it, but still did well. Eventually my hatred turned into a complete mental breakdown, I refused to go anymore, and after a search transferred to a super fancy independent study school (cost: $15k/yr) where I got to meet one-on-one with my teachers, or in small classes of less than 5 students. This school cured my depression in a few months and developed my intellectual and artistic passions over the next couple of years. Several of my friends followed me there in the next year or two, with similar positive effects on their sanity. If only everyone had this opportunity! Alas, Seattle spends only $15k per student in their public schools :-( Here's the data for all 50 states as a whole [1]. > Charter schools often pop up, look sexy, and vary extremely widely. Again some good, a lot of "meh" and some bad. This is famously true of different public school districts as well. I'm not willing to discount anything that help move us away from the deranged format of traditional schools. [1] https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/public-education-costs-per-pupil-by-state-rankings/ https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/p...

tmaly 8y ago
Something must be wrong here, how can a super fancy school with 1:5 ratio cost 15k and the per-student cost of public school cost 15k?
- jelliclesfarm 8y ago
  Pensions. Public school systems are unionized.
- earthicus 8y ago
  The source i linked to gives a breakdown of how the public school money is spent in the second section, titled 'Where are schools spending their money?' You can see that Public schools have many legitimate expenses that private schools don't, along with bureaucratic overhead. However, the reason my school could get away with such a small ratio, even compared to other private schools that cost the same, is because it is an independent study school - I only went two days a week for a few hours a day. Imagine you have one teacher working for 10 hours and 10 students. If each student goes all 10 hours, your ratio is 1:10. If each student goes only 1 hour, your ratio is 1:1.