9 ms·

I've really re-evaluated my views of public vs. private schools during this crisis. I like a lot about our local public schools, but the district is strapped f

I've really re-evaluated my views of public vs. private schools during this crisis. I like a lot about our local public schools, but the district is strapped for cash and we are wondering if our kids will be back this school year. Meanwhile I'm browsing private schools websites and starting to notice all the opportunities my kids are missing. Private schools can offer so much more and I'm not sure why we never seriously looked into them. They cost, sure, but we could put the money together if we wanted to. There's been a steady outflow of parents from public to private around here and I don't think those kids are coming back. I don't know where this ends, but I don't think it ends well for public schools. It's a pity.

tuna-piano 6y ago
The real pity is that your local public school is likely spending a similar amount per student as the private schools![1] Our public school system spends a ton and seems to not get a good value for that spending. You can believe in government funded education without believing in government run education. After all, we have a food stamp program but few would argue for a government grocery store chain instead of food stamps. Why is it that the cities in America have such great restaurants but such poor schools? [1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2020/comm/school-system-spending.html https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2020/comm/scho...
- majormajor 6y ago
  > Why is it that the cities in America have such great restaurants but such poor schools? This isn't really accurate, is it? Food options for the poor in America are pretty notably terrible. Nutrition-wise, it's not great for most of the middle class either. If you have a lot of money, you can find people to help you in America, which is true for both food and school. But I'd much rather be poor in a public school - I went to one - than be poor and have to rely on the bottom of the barrel of the US restaurant and food system. I haven't seen evidence that the private or public school system is particularly GOOD at overcoming a lot of the challenges that many kids face with poverty, but I also haven't seen the free market in the US be good at providing the poor with quality options in other areas. (Note also that there are many many countries with much more socialized government programs that also have good restaurants too! Ones that might sneer at the chain-heavy state of American restaurants in most US cities!)
  - tlear 6y ago
    Charter school outperform public schools in poor areas by orders of magnitude. Read Sowel’s Charter School and their enemies, it makes a very a strong argument about the situation https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50623786-charter-schools-and-their-enemies https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50623786-charter-schools...
    - paulryanrogers 6y ago
      Families with kids at charter schools choose to put their kids there. Kids left in bad public schools may have less parent support. So there may be some selection bias involved that can't be overcome with any amount of money.
      - mjevans 6y ago
        I have a hypothesis that most of the students causing problems at today's public schools are the result of problems at home; be that a lack of resources, parents whom society hasn't given the time to be parents, or a lack of knowledge about how to be a good parent. Better social safety nets and support for everyone should be an real investment in the future for everyone.
        paulryanrogers 6y ago
        My SO has taught in some rough schools and home issues are part of the picture. It also seems like especially disruptive kids need to be moved into classes with increasingly smaller numbers of students. That way teachers can more fairly provide for the needs of everyone. Of course this would all be more expensive. So as a society we'd have to agree such solutions are worth investing in at a scale that will make a significant difference.
      - tlear 6y ago
        That is addressed in the book(this counter argument was my first reaction as well). Charter schools get kids from lottery(demand FAR outstrips supply) well they did research and tracked kids who were in lottery and did not get in. Their outcomes were far worse than those who got in. My own conclusion from reading it is that few things really make difference: 1. Charters have strict discipline, violence etc is not tolerated in any form. Public school in bad areas are chaos 2. Schools can easily fire teachers who do not perform well. In public school system you need to rape or murder someone to get fired. 3. Shitty charter schools lose their charter and go out of business
- nineplay 6y ago
  > Our public school system spends a ton and seems to not get a good value for that spending. Our public school systems spends a ton to support low income students and special ed. I don't blame them for being broke but I suppose at some point my egalitarian principles aren't enough and I should do what's best for my kids rather than what's best for our city.
  - hnracer 6y ago
    I'd argue those two things are one and the same
  - mar177 6y ago
    I thought most of the funding comes from local property taxes. That means there are little or no cross subsidies. I image special ed is a huge cost, specially for kids that need to be home schooled. But even that is unlikely to explain the high cost of public schools, and it definitely does not explain the increasing costs.
  - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
    I agree with your concerns, but my motivation would be slightly different. The brightest kids. They will be running this country in twenty years. They will be designing bridges, doing surgeries and writing our laws. We want to invest in them.
    - nineplay 6y ago
      I strongly believe that a lot of our brightest kids are languishing in bad schools due to poor family circumstances and I think it should be a source of national shame.
      - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
        I vote both hands for AP programs in poor schools. I'm just saying that if we can only retain one of "special needs" and "advanced", I'd pick advanced in a blink of an eye due to the reason explained above. Disclaimer: my kids don't qualify for either.
- jimhefferon 6y ago
  Many private schools do not provide the same set of services, such as the speech intervention that helped my oldest so much.
- Steltek 6y ago
  The pity is that public schools are now the backstop for real social services that have already failed. Much like police being used to combat drug addiction and mental illness. It's a burden/cost that private schools don't have to deal with. The solution isn't to go all-in on private or charter schools. It's to get real social programs back up and running so that public schools can just be schools.
  - primrose 6y ago
    Like Denmark!
offtop5 6y ago
Wouldn't it be cheaper to move to more affluent area ? My logic here is you could spend that would be tuition money in more expensive housing market and get better schools .
- sjg007 6y ago
  People do this but communities also zone out lower income housing. My community says they will bring down property values.
  - offtop5 6y ago
    In one part of LA theirs basically a small city completely surrounded by LA called Culver City. Culver City allowed for low income housing to be built , but then didn't allow those low income families to attend Culver City schools. Pretty overt classism( along with some other isms )
- nineplay 6y ago
  District lines are funny things. Our neighborhood could certainly be called 'affluent' and our schools are probably the best in the district. What I'm realizing is how little that counts for. We could have chosen a cheaper neighborhood in a 'nicer' district but 9 years ago it didn't seem like such a big deal.
- francisofascii 6y ago
  Yes, it would be cheaper in the long run. The problem is the housing cost differential can be several hundred K, and you may not be able to get a mortgage approved or find a low end home in the affluent area.
- surge 6y ago
  This is one problem I think remote learning could solve, like geographic arbitrage. Just like before Netflix, Hulu, Disney+ etc you had one cable provider in your location, the package gave you some of the channels you wanted but never everything, and a lot of channels you didn't now you can do what you want, and your provider isn't based on your geographic location. Remote learning allows you to choose a school, or even a teacher based on your kids needs. Pick one that has the teaching method you want, say you have a kid with dyslexia but none of the teachers in your local school have experience with it. You can now go to the "school" or class with the teacher that specializes in teaching kids with dyslexia. Your school system doesn't pay enough to hire and keep good teachers or at least live comfortably in your area? Say 40-60k in your city doesn't go far enough there, but the teacher could be in a cheaper city or state as long as they're board certified in your state. The inverse could be true, a really good teacher could work for NYC schools making good money, but live in NY State. Some rural communities are hiring teachers out of the Philippines because they can't find good teachers willing to live in those areas, remote learning may also help solve this need. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/05/arizona-teachers-filipino-schools-low-pay https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/05/arizona-teac... https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/schools-in-illinois-florida-arizona-and-colorado-hiring-teachers-from-philippines-to-fight-staff-shortages https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/schools-in-illinois-florid...
madengr 6y ago
Not necessarily. My kids went to private school then public school. While private is definitely good, you may not get the classes that are offered in public; high school at least. As a freshman, my daughter gets to take symphonic and chamber orchestra classes, so that’s 2 hours of cello playing just in school, then she can do another 2 hours of practice at home.
sjg007 6y ago
Private schools win in this pandemic because they can be in person basically 5 days a week. But good luck getting any type of special education services in private school. They will kick out kids just after the check is cashed.
- briandear 6y ago
  That is a blanket statement and it just isn’t true. There are kids in my kids’ private school that have learning disabilities and our school not only has an on staff psychologist but also works with outside consultants to help on the more difficult cases. The school is extremely supportive. And there are plenty of public schools with abysmal special ed. My point is that such blanket statements aren’t true.
  - mrkurt 6y ago
    It's broadly true. It's not feasible for private schools to provide special ed services. It costs about 3x as much per student than general ed. There is a strong incentive to keep special ed populations small or nonexistent at every private school. Both to save money and improve the overall "success" rate of their students.
    - coryrc 6y ago
      The other incentive being the general ed students get a better education.
      - dalyons 6y ago
        How so?
      - imtringued 6y ago
        I don't think so. If you want to meaningfully drag down everyone in class then ask lots of pointless questions about minute details. Keep the conversation going for 5 minutes. Then do this three times per class. If you have 3 people like that in your class then expect to learn nothing. Students with physical disabilities are usually very expensive to accommodate but not stupid or annoying. They might "ruin" their own education but not anyone else's.
qualifiedai 6y ago
our two kids (elementary school and pre-school) go to a private school in Bay Area and we are very happy now. They have in-person classes with very strict high covid-related guideliness. When they were required to close they offered an excellent online classes and lowered tuition 35%. On the other hand, a lot of our friends with kids of similar age are super unhappy about their public schools. The quality of education and online classes is very, very low and they can't re-open in person due to class sizes. I now know several families who basically ran away from public schools to either do homeschooling (with other parents) or private school. Very sad situation to watch
- hnracer 6y ago
  It's just your typical government incompetence, unfortunately.
  - asdasfasdfasdf 6y ago
    I think you're missing the fact that running a successful school is much easier when you can kick out anyone you want for any reason. Schools have been underfunded for decades. They're part of our failing infrastructure. Teachers pay for supplies out of their own pockets. Education 5% of our federal budget. The military is 60%. You can blame the specter of incompetence, but it's ultimately our fault for electing leaders who aren't acting in our best interests.
- markdoubleyou 6y ago
  I'm genuinely curious what "excellent online classes" look like, especially for early elementary school. My second grader in Seattle Public Schools isn't learning a thing (except for how to troubleshoot MS Teams).
  - qualifiedai 6y ago
    for pre-K: music - singing songs with her class, also dancing/gymnastics (project to a bigger screen). story-time after lunch. for kindergarten: actually a lot of classes: art, second language (most kids in school are bi-lingual En+Ru), basic reading and math, also music, dance, gymnastics (again bigger screen helps here). I would say it was actually pretty good and easy on us (parents) for kindergaten. But, yes, it is still tough for pre-K kid as she needed much more attention from us.
spongepoc 6y ago
The market always prevails over the state. Private schools can only charge as much as the demonstrated quality of their product while the state as the default option is not accountable to anyone because those who can afford better can escape them.
- nineplay 6y ago
  > Private schools can only charge as much as the demonstrated quality of their product Part of my aversion to private schools has been about what constitutes 'quality'. For a lot of wealthy parents, 'quality' seems to mean that their kids get straight As without putting in much effort. Money corrupts. Private schools aren't going to easily give up on $30k a year.
  - WoodenChair 6y ago
    That’s not been my experience. A strong statement like that needs to be backed up by data not an anecdote though. Can you share a study showing private schools are less academically rigorous than public schools and/or give easier As?
  - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
    That's not my experience. Many private schools are proud of their discipline and ability to squeeze all the sweat out of kids.
  - cameronfraser 6y ago
    I went to a private school for 2 years in HS and it was far more challenging academically than public school, was also harder to get A's so I distrust your statement. Most private schools also have waiting lists to get in so doubt the schools care.
itronitron 6y ago
Top public high schools are often better than private high schools. The public school can offer a greater variety of classes and extracurricular activities because they have more students. Private high schools have a much narrower view so are not a great fit for everyone.
- twblalock 6y ago
  Right, but the difference is that you can only send your kids to a top public school if you live in the right district (barring irregular exceptions like charter schools). You can send your kid to any private school you want within driving distance of your home, if you can afford it.
  - shard 6y ago
    When I think of top public high schools, I include magnet schools, which are also only limited by travel time, as long as you gain admission.
  - lttlrck 6y ago
    By the same token you can live in the right district "if you can afford it".
- nineplay 6y ago
  That's what I'd thought, and our public high school does have an excellent reputation. That said, the pricey private school sends kids on a 'cultural expedition' to Malaysia.
  - an_opabinia 6y ago
    It's difficult for random people on the Internet to know what's right for you and your children, but I hope everyone tells you your heart is in the right place and naturally enrichment is something they'll come to appreciate as much as many other things. The simple reality of it is if your kids have a natural aptitude for taking standardized tests well with little studying, they are sort of wasting their time in normal schools. Like how else are they going to be evaluated, or the quality objectively measured, if not tests? And then, if your kids just test well, without studying, they have this true gift for whatever idiosyncratic reason... Why not go to a "cultural expedition" to Malaysia every month? Why do 4 hours of homework instead of 30 minutes? Why read 1 chapter or fewer of many books, instead of 1 book you really enjoy? Why not spend all day reading 1 book every day, instead of taking 9 classes, 8 of which you don't enjoy? Why do this structure designed for maximizing SAT scores and common app competitiveness? That is why you can get away with reading almost no books in high school and get an A in English, why you can take 10 classes and 4 extracurriculars and seemingly excel at all of them. It's not designed for anything earnest - of course it is impossible for a kid to excel at everything, of course there's something broken with the way naturally good test takers are evaluated. Why not, as one mom put it to me, "pet fluffy animals" the whole day one day a week? A lot of schooling, public or private, is stuck in a feedback loop where they are good at making the average student excel at test taking - recall, the only objective measure of performance - attracting more average students, thereby making their focus on improving test performance even more intense. So many families are stuck in this trap, a relentless focus on making average students test well. Testing well - at once totally useless and also sometimes just given to some kids, by some gift. If you're affluent and have such a child, listen they're not going to celebrate the homework, the cramming, the well-roundedness, the being-forced-to-do-shit. It will not ever be relevant in their life. If they have the natural aptitude for testing, it is impossible for the prevailing social order from distinguishing them from someone without that natural aptitude who studies 10x as hard. This is the future of remote learning. Unlocking happiness for the small number of deeply misallocated children. Not helping the average student. Testing is the culprit for their misery, not remote learning, and tell me, what alternative is there?
edgarvaldes 6y ago
In my country kids are leaving private schools during pandemic in favor of public ones.
- nineplay 6y ago
  Why is that? Do you mind sharing the country?
analog31 6y ago
What we have right now is partially privatized schooling with a public back-up. The private schools don't have to deal with the problem of capacity in general, and in the geographic distribution of capacity in particular. They don't have to provide capacity for special needs kids. You can choose a prime location to build a private school for 100 kids, and be reasonably assured that it will be filled with 100 kids. If not, it shuts down and the kids go elsewhere or back to the public schools. This happens sometimes. And while the training of teachers is certainly a worthy matter of debate, the hiring of teachers by public schools is coupled with a standardization of teacher training and a guarantee of reasonable wages thanks to the union. I predict where it ends is a small number of companies form an oligopoly of private school operators that are perpetually bailed out by the government. I also predict the emergence of local or even regional "school deserts" where families have no school options.
- primrose 6y ago
  Market forces fix all of this. Give vouchers and let the parent's decide.
  - analog31 6y ago
    Availability will dictate choice to a large extent unless there is a fair amount of overcapacity. What if there are no schools with available capacity within, say, 40 miles? What if a large region has exactly one company operating schools? What if that company goes out of business during the school year? Why aren't other countries lining up to try voucher schools? Let's see some success stories. What are the choice criteria that parents are supposed to sort out when trying to get their kid into an available seat?
    - primrose 6y ago
      What if there's not a(n) _______ with in 40 miles? Yet loads of people live 40 miles away from a lot of things. Somehow the market provides for them. "What if a large region has exactly one company operating schools?" Like today with government run schools? "What if that company goes out of business during the school year?" Fair point. Are you assuming there won't be competition? Stager voucher payments through out the school year. "Why aren't other countries lining up to try voucher schools?" Indoctrination. Very effective way of controlling thought. I would recommend reading the origins of US schooling, from Prussia. https://www.forcedschool.com/post/69947261758/the-prussian-model https://www.forcedschool.com/post/69947261758/the-prussian-m... "Let's see some success stories." Denmark. Education dollars are tied to the student not the school district. Their kids are pretty smart. "What are the choice criteria that parents are supposed to sort out when trying to get their kid into an available seat?" More choice then what they currently have. Markets, devoid of gov incentives (unlike health care and education), do a good job with oversupply.

tuna-piano 6y ago

The real pity is that your local public school is likely spending a similar amount per student as the private schools![1] Our public school system spends a ton and seems to not get a good value for that spending. You can believe in government funded education without believing in government run education. After all, we have a food stamp program but few would argue for a government grocery store chain instead of food stamps. Why is it that the cities in America have such great restaurants but such poor schools? [1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2020/comm/school-system-spending.html https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2020/comm/scho...

majormajor 6y ago
> Why is it that the cities in America have such great restaurants but such poor schools? This isn't really accurate, is it? Food options for the poor in America are pretty notably terrible. Nutrition-wise, it's not great for most of the middle class either. If you have a lot of money, you can find people to help you in America, which is true for both food and school. But I'd much rather be poor in a public school - I went to one - than be poor and have to rely on the bottom of the barrel of the US restaurant and food system. I haven't seen evidence that the private or public school system is particularly GOOD at overcoming a lot of the challenges that many kids face with poverty, but I also haven't seen the free market in the US be good at providing the poor with quality options in other areas. (Note also that there are many many countries with much more socialized government programs that also have good restaurants too! Ones that might sneer at the chain-heavy state of American restaurants in most US cities!)
- tlear 6y ago
  Charter school outperform public schools in poor areas by orders of magnitude. Read Sowel’s Charter School and their enemies, it makes a very a strong argument about the situation https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50623786-charter-schools-and-their-enemies https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50623786-charter-schools...
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    Families with kids at charter schools choose to put their kids there. Kids left in bad public schools may have less parent support. So there may be some selection bias involved that can't be overcome with any amount of money.
    - mjevans 6y ago
      I have a hypothesis that most of the students causing problems at today's public schools are the result of problems at home; be that a lack of resources, parents whom society hasn't given the time to be parents, or a lack of knowledge about how to be a good parent. Better social safety nets and support for everyone should be an real investment in the future for everyone.
      - paulryanrogers 6y ago
        My SO has taught in some rough schools and home issues are part of the picture. It also seems like especially disruptive kids need to be moved into classes with increasingly smaller numbers of students. That way teachers can more fairly provide for the needs of everyone. Of course this would all be more expensive. So as a society we'd have to agree such solutions are worth investing in at a scale that will make a significant difference.
    - tlear 6y ago
      That is addressed in the book(this counter argument was my first reaction as well). Charter schools get kids from lottery(demand FAR outstrips supply) well they did research and tracked kids who were in lottery and did not get in. Their outcomes were far worse than those who got in. My own conclusion from reading it is that few things really make difference: 1. Charters have strict discipline, violence etc is not tolerated in any form. Public school in bad areas are chaos 2. Schools can easily fire teachers who do not perform well. In public school system you need to rape or murder someone to get fired. 3. Shitty charter schools lose their charter and go out of business
nineplay 6y ago
> Our public school system spends a ton and seems to not get a good value for that spending. Our public school systems spends a ton to support low income students and special ed. I don't blame them for being broke but I suppose at some point my egalitarian principles aren't enough and I should do what's best for my kids rather than what's best for our city.
- hnracer 6y ago
  I'd argue those two things are one and the same
- mar177 6y ago
  I thought most of the funding comes from local property taxes. That means there are little or no cross subsidies. I image special ed is a huge cost, specially for kids that need to be home schooled. But even that is unlikely to explain the high cost of public schools, and it definitely does not explain the increasing costs.
- AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
  I agree with your concerns, but my motivation would be slightly different. The brightest kids. They will be running this country in twenty years. They will be designing bridges, doing surgeries and writing our laws. We want to invest in them.
  - nineplay 6y ago
    I strongly believe that a lot of our brightest kids are languishing in bad schools due to poor family circumstances and I think it should be a source of national shame.
    - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
      I vote both hands for AP programs in poor schools. I'm just saying that if we can only retain one of "special needs" and "advanced", I'd pick advanced in a blink of an eye due to the reason explained above. Disclaimer: my kids don't qualify for either.
jimhefferon 6y ago
Many private schools do not provide the same set of services, such as the speech intervention that helped my oldest so much.
Steltek 6y ago
The pity is that public schools are now the backstop for real social services that have already failed. Much like police being used to combat drug addiction and mental illness. It's a burden/cost that private schools don't have to deal with. The solution isn't to go all-in on private or charter schools. It's to get real social programs back up and running so that public schools can just be schools.
- primrose 6y ago
  Like Denmark!

offtop5 6y ago

Wouldn't it be cheaper to move to more affluent area ? My logic here is you could spend that would be tuition money in more expensive housing market and get better schools .

sjg007 6y ago
People do this but communities also zone out lower income housing. My community says they will bring down property values.
- offtop5 6y ago
  In one part of LA theirs basically a small city completely surrounded by LA called Culver City. Culver City allowed for low income housing to be built , but then didn't allow those low income families to attend Culver City schools. Pretty overt classism( along with some other isms )
nineplay 6y ago
District lines are funny things. Our neighborhood could certainly be called 'affluent' and our schools are probably the best in the district. What I'm realizing is how little that counts for. We could have chosen a cheaper neighborhood in a 'nicer' district but 9 years ago it didn't seem like such a big deal.
francisofascii 6y ago
Yes, it would be cheaper in the long run. The problem is the housing cost differential can be several hundred K, and you may not be able to get a mortgage approved or find a low end home in the affluent area.
surge 6y ago
This is one problem I think remote learning could solve, like geographic arbitrage. Just like before Netflix, Hulu, Disney+ etc you had one cable provider in your location, the package gave you some of the channels you wanted but never everything, and a lot of channels you didn't now you can do what you want, and your provider isn't based on your geographic location. Remote learning allows you to choose a school, or even a teacher based on your kids needs. Pick one that has the teaching method you want, say you have a kid with dyslexia but none of the teachers in your local school have experience with it. You can now go to the "school" or class with the teacher that specializes in teaching kids with dyslexia. Your school system doesn't pay enough to hire and keep good teachers or at least live comfortably in your area? Say 40-60k in your city doesn't go far enough there, but the teacher could be in a cheaper city or state as long as they're board certified in your state. The inverse could be true, a really good teacher could work for NYC schools making good money, but live in NY State. Some rural communities are hiring teachers out of the Philippines because they can't find good teachers willing to live in those areas, remote learning may also help solve this need. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/05/arizona-teachers-filipino-schools-low-pay https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/05/arizona-teac... https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/schools-in-illinois-florida-arizona-and-colorado-hiring-teachers-from-philippines-to-fight-staff-shortages https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/schools-in-illinois-florid...

madengr 6y ago

Not necessarily. My kids went to private school then public school. While private is definitely good, you may not get the classes that are offered in public; high school at least. As a freshman, my daughter gets to take symphonic and chamber orchestra classes, so that’s 2 hours of cello playing just in school, then she can do another 2 hours of practice at home.

sjg007 6y ago

Private schools win in this pandemic because they can be in person basically 5 days a week. But good luck getting any type of special education services in private school. They will kick out kids just after the check is cashed.

briandear 6y ago
That is a blanket statement and it just isn’t true. There are kids in my kids’ private school that have learning disabilities and our school not only has an on staff psychologist but also works with outside consultants to help on the more difficult cases. The school is extremely supportive. And there are plenty of public schools with abysmal special ed. My point is that such blanket statements aren’t true.
- mrkurt 6y ago
  It's broadly true. It's not feasible for private schools to provide special ed services. It costs about 3x as much per student than general ed. There is a strong incentive to keep special ed populations small or nonexistent at every private school. Both to save money and improve the overall "success" rate of their students.
  - coryrc 6y ago
    The other incentive being the general ed students get a better education.
    - dalyons 6y ago
      How so?
    - imtringued 6y ago
      I don't think so. If you want to meaningfully drag down everyone in class then ask lots of pointless questions about minute details. Keep the conversation going for 5 minutes. Then do this three times per class. If you have 3 people like that in your class then expect to learn nothing. Students with physical disabilities are usually very expensive to accommodate but not stupid or annoying. They might "ruin" their own education but not anyone else's.

qualifiedai 6y ago

our two kids (elementary school and pre-school) go to a private school in Bay Area and we are very happy now. They have in-person classes with very strict high covid-related guideliness. When they were required to close they offered an excellent online classes and lowered tuition 35%. On the other hand, a lot of our friends with kids of similar age are super unhappy about their public schools. The quality of education and online classes is very, very low and they can't re-open in person due to class sizes. I now know several families who basically ran away from public schools to either do homeschooling (with other parents) or private school. Very sad situation to watch

hnracer 6y ago
It's just your typical government incompetence, unfortunately.
- asdasfasdfasdf 6y ago
  I think you're missing the fact that running a successful school is much easier when you can kick out anyone you want for any reason. Schools have been underfunded for decades. They're part of our failing infrastructure. Teachers pay for supplies out of their own pockets. Education 5% of our federal budget. The military is 60%. You can blame the specter of incompetence, but it's ultimately our fault for electing leaders who aren't acting in our best interests.
markdoubleyou 6y ago
I'm genuinely curious what "excellent online classes" look like, especially for early elementary school. My second grader in Seattle Public Schools isn't learning a thing (except for how to troubleshoot MS Teams).
- qualifiedai 6y ago
  for pre-K: music - singing songs with her class, also dancing/gymnastics (project to a bigger screen). story-time after lunch. for kindergarten: actually a lot of classes: art, second language (most kids in school are bi-lingual En+Ru), basic reading and math, also music, dance, gymnastics (again bigger screen helps here). I would say it was actually pretty good and easy on us (parents) for kindergaten. But, yes, it is still tough for pre-K kid as she needed much more attention from us.

spongepoc 6y ago

The market always prevails over the state. Private schools can only charge as much as the demonstrated quality of their product while the state as the default option is not accountable to anyone because those who can afford better can escape them.

nineplay 6y ago
> Private schools can only charge as much as the demonstrated quality of their product Part of my aversion to private schools has been about what constitutes 'quality'. For a lot of wealthy parents, 'quality' seems to mean that their kids get straight As without putting in much effort. Money corrupts. Private schools aren't going to easily give up on $30k a year.
- WoodenChair 6y ago
  That’s not been my experience. A strong statement like that needs to be backed up by data not an anecdote though. Can you share a study showing private schools are less academically rigorous than public schools and/or give easier As?
- AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
  That's not my experience. Many private schools are proud of their discipline and ability to squeeze all the sweat out of kids.
- cameronfraser 6y ago
  I went to a private school for 2 years in HS and it was far more challenging academically than public school, was also harder to get A's so I distrust your statement. Most private schools also have waiting lists to get in so doubt the schools care.

itronitron 6y ago

Top public high schools are often better than private high schools. The public school can offer a greater variety of classes and extracurricular activities because they have more students. Private high schools have a much narrower view so are not a great fit for everyone.

twblalock 6y ago
Right, but the difference is that you can only send your kids to a top public school if you live in the right district (barring irregular exceptions like charter schools). You can send your kid to any private school you want within driving distance of your home, if you can afford it.
- shard 6y ago
  When I think of top public high schools, I include magnet schools, which are also only limited by travel time, as long as you gain admission.
- lttlrck 6y ago
  By the same token you can live in the right district "if you can afford it".
nineplay 6y ago
That's what I'd thought, and our public high school does have an excellent reputation. That said, the pricey private school sends kids on a 'cultural expedition' to Malaysia.
- an_opabinia 6y ago
  It's difficult for random people on the Internet to know what's right for you and your children, but I hope everyone tells you your heart is in the right place and naturally enrichment is something they'll come to appreciate as much as many other things. The simple reality of it is if your kids have a natural aptitude for taking standardized tests well with little studying, they are sort of wasting their time in normal schools. Like how else are they going to be evaluated, or the quality objectively measured, if not tests? And then, if your kids just test well, without studying, they have this true gift for whatever idiosyncratic reason... Why not go to a "cultural expedition" to Malaysia every month? Why do 4 hours of homework instead of 30 minutes? Why read 1 chapter or fewer of many books, instead of 1 book you really enjoy? Why not spend all day reading 1 book every day, instead of taking 9 classes, 8 of which you don't enjoy? Why do this structure designed for maximizing SAT scores and common app competitiveness? That is why you can get away with reading almost no books in high school and get an A in English, why you can take 10 classes and 4 extracurriculars and seemingly excel at all of them. It's not designed for anything earnest - of course it is impossible for a kid to excel at everything, of course there's something broken with the way naturally good test takers are evaluated. Why not, as one mom put it to me, "pet fluffy animals" the whole day one day a week? A lot of schooling, public or private, is stuck in a feedback loop where they are good at making the average student excel at test taking - recall, the only objective measure of performance - attracting more average students, thereby making their focus on improving test performance even more intense. So many families are stuck in this trap, a relentless focus on making average students test well. Testing well - at once totally useless and also sometimes just given to some kids, by some gift. If you're affluent and have such a child, listen they're not going to celebrate the homework, the cramming, the well-roundedness, the being-forced-to-do-shit. It will not ever be relevant in their life. If they have the natural aptitude for testing, it is impossible for the prevailing social order from distinguishing them from someone without that natural aptitude who studies 10x as hard. This is the future of remote learning. Unlocking happiness for the small number of deeply misallocated children. Not helping the average student. Testing is the culprit for their misery, not remote learning, and tell me, what alternative is there?

edgarvaldes 6y ago

In my country kids are leaving private schools during pandemic in favor of public ones.

nineplay 6y ago
Why is that? Do you mind sharing the country?

analog31 6y ago

What we have right now is partially privatized schooling with a public back-up. The private schools don't have to deal with the problem of capacity in general, and in the geographic distribution of capacity in particular. They don't have to provide capacity for special needs kids. You can choose a prime location to build a private school for 100 kids, and be reasonably assured that it will be filled with 100 kids. If not, it shuts down and the kids go elsewhere or back to the public schools. This happens sometimes. And while the training of teachers is certainly a worthy matter of debate, the hiring of teachers by public schools is coupled with a standardization of teacher training and a guarantee of reasonable wages thanks to the union. I predict where it ends is a small number of companies form an oligopoly of private school operators that are perpetually bailed out by the government. I also predict the emergence of local or even regional "school deserts" where families have no school options.

primrose 6y ago
Market forces fix all of this. Give vouchers and let the parent's decide.
- analog31 6y ago
  Availability will dictate choice to a large extent unless there is a fair amount of overcapacity. What if there are no schools with available capacity within, say, 40 miles? What if a large region has exactly one company operating schools? What if that company goes out of business during the school year? Why aren't other countries lining up to try voucher schools? Let's see some success stories. What are the choice criteria that parents are supposed to sort out when trying to get their kid into an available seat?
  - primrose 6y ago
    What if there's not a(n) _______ with in 40 miles? Yet loads of people live 40 miles away from a lot of things. Somehow the market provides for them. "What if a large region has exactly one company operating schools?" Like today with government run schools? "What if that company goes out of business during the school year?" Fair point. Are you assuming there won't be competition? Stager voucher payments through out the school year. "Why aren't other countries lining up to try voucher schools?" Indoctrination. Very effective way of controlling thought. I would recommend reading the origins of US schooling, from Prussia. https://www.forcedschool.com/post/69947261758/the-prussian-model https://www.forcedschool.com/post/69947261758/the-prussian-m... "Let's see some success stories." Denmark. Education dollars are tied to the student not the school district. Their kids are pretty smart. "What are the choice criteria that parents are supposed to sort out when trying to get their kid into an available seat?" More choice then what they currently have. Markets, devoid of gov incentives (unlike health care and education), do a good job with oversupply.