Are private schools really better than public schools?

From here: Are private schools really better than public schools?

Excerpt:

Although the survey claims only to look at factors that contribute to a future sense of well-being (good job, good life) rather than how well educated students are, there is a tacit invitation for people to draw conclusions about the superior quality of an NAIS education. As a result, the report could have unintended consequences, the most dangerous of which is confirming a tendency to believe that education in independent schools must be better than what happens in public schools.

Click to expand...

... After all, just look at the numbers used in the NAIS fliers: “77 percent of NAIS grads complete college on time, compared to 64 percent of public school grads,” and about the same percentages enjoy academic challenges.

Click to expand...

So why mess with success? Here's why:
*The difference in the percentages quoted above is minimal - only 13%. Yeah, OK, so "13%" is not so little and, of course, we want "want only the best for our kids".
*Far too many of us want the best, which is creating both a social and an economic cleavage in society due to the present scheme of financing education - which is outdated. And our kids going to school with kids from the same socioeconomic context is not going to help.
*Whyzzat? Because it is in our youth that we learn to meet/greet/like-or-dislike the people who surround us on a frequent basis in school. The experience forms long-lasting personal opinions of our societal-context, and, unfortunately, our prejudices as well.

And so? So this:
*This is not a monologue against private-school education. Just a word of caution for those who do not want necessarily to educate their children into class-prejudices that can last a lifetime.
*This socioeconomic context of ours is a non-homogenous blend of peoples and families from very different contexts. We are all still Americans and One Nation. Despite the fact that gross-unfairness exists in terms of Income Disparity throughout the nation, east-and-west as well as north-and-south.
*Is that unfairness acceptable? Nope. And it is due largely to our educational system which is NOT FREE, GRATIS AND FOR NOTHING at the tertiary-schooling level. As it should be.
*Whyzat? It happened for the same reason that as America evolved out of the Agricultural Age into the Industrial Age we understood the necessity of assuring a Primary and Secondary Education. (Coming off the farms into better-paying industrial jobs were people who could not even read and write.)
*Most importantly, Age Change is happening once again. We are exiting the Industrial Age and entering the Information Age, for which knowledge and knowhow become key necessities. Both of those attributes comes from a higher educational level throughout the Tertiary Level - vocational, associates, bachelors, masters, doctorate.
*And in order to assure that ALL our people have the same opportunity, Post-secondary Education should free, gratis and for nothing.

It is in Europe. I live in France, and I've sent my two kids to university for less than $600 (in euros) per year plus room-'n-board.

I am thus assured that they have the best chances to make good with their lives. The necessary education is there, the rest is up to their efforts and Lady-Luck.

There are a whole lot of great paying skilled jobs in manufacturing being staffed by vets with electrical/electronics and people with a 2 year vocational/associates. And being one of those people with a 2 year, the only reason it’s required is because people coming out of public high school are so... unqualified.

I don’t think we should be publicly funding college because the lower schools are failing, and in the process pushing a lot of kids who aren’t cut out for college out of skilled jobs they could do.

Yet they could be. We dont need just more wood shop. We need more applied mathematics, like accounting and budgeting and taxes, we need more home ec/cooking, we need welding and fabrication, we need basic electricity, electronics and programming. At the teen years or younger.

But that would require a hard look at education and I don’t think the dominant left in education is willing to work together for solution we all think would be better.

Aberration said:

There are a whole lot of great paying skilled jobs in manufacturing being staffed by vets with electrical/electronics and people with a 2 year vocational/associates. And being one of those people with a 2 year, the only reason it’s required is because people coming out of public high school are so... unqualified.

I don’t think we should be publicly funding college because the lower schools are failing, and in the process pushing a lot of kids who aren’t cut out for college out of skilled jobs they could do.

Yet they could be. We dont need just more wood shop. We need more applied mathematics, like accounting and budgeting and taxes, we need more home ec/cooking, we need welding and fabrication, we need basic electricity, electronics and programming. At the teen years or younger.

But that would require a hard look at education and I don’t think the dominant left in education is willing to work together for solution we all think would be better.

Click to expand...

I don't see a problem with doing any of it so long as we cut our military budget just a smidgeon to compensate.

Don’t need to. We can actually just quit teach stupid **** and focus on what is actually necessary.

Aberration said:

Don’t need to. We can actually just quit teach stupid **** and focus on what is actually necessary.

Click to expand...

What's actually necessary and who decides?

It is very difficult to compare the effectiveness of private schools to public schools. Public schools have to take in everyone. Private schools can be picky about who they admit. So before private schools ever even teach the kids a thing they are starting off with a group of kids who are more academically capable.

Skeptic Bob said:

It is very difficult to compare the effectiveness of private schools to public schools. Public schools have to take in everyone. Private schools can be picky about who they admit. So before private schools ever even teach the kids a thing they are starting off with a group of kids who are more academically capable.

Click to expand...

Valid point. And if you look at methods, public schools are more often more creative. Private schools large do little to nothign different.

Aberration said:

There are a whole lot of great paying skilled jobs in manufacturing being staffed by vets with electrical/electronics and people with a 2 year vocational/associates. And being one of those people with a 2 year, the only reason it’s required is because people coming out of public high school are so... unqualified.

I don’t think we should be publicly funding college because the lower schools are failing, and in the process pushing a lot of kids who aren’t cut out for college out of skilled jobs they could do.

Yet they could be. We dont need just more wood shop. We need more applied mathematics, like accounting and budgeting and taxes, we need more home ec/cooking, we need welding and fabrication, we need basic electricity, electronics and programming. At the teen years or younger.

But that would require a hard look at education and I don’t think the dominant left in education is willing to work together for solution we all think would be better.

Click to expand...

A lot of what you listed also requires good university education.

Skeptic Bob said:

It is very difficult to compare the effectiveness of private schools to public schools. Public schools have to take in everyone. Private schools can be picky about who they admit. So before private schools ever even teach the kids a thing they are starting off with a group of kids who are more academically capable.

Click to expand...

And as a general rule kids who go to private schools come from a higher socioeconomic background which IMO has an even greater correlation to academic success than school choice. We have no private schools where I live, guess which kids succeeded (some of them wildly) and guess which kids failed (again some of them spectacularly).

depends on the school. my parents both dedicated their lives to being public school teachers, and my wife has taught at both public and private schools. i graduated from a public school, and got a great education. my wife has taught at both, and my impression is that the private school didn't treat her nearly as well. this makes sense, as they have to skim the money from somewhere. i don't support using public money for private schools except in extreme circumstances. i also don't support creating those extreme circumstances so that public money can go to for-profit schools.

Last time I looked, we were 13th among the OECD countries, and dropping.

That's a recipe for the rich to have all the power, but it's also a recipe for misery, political unrest, and a crappy economy.

It's a competitive world, and we're losing ground.

late said:

Last time I looked, we were 13th among the OECD countries, and dropping.

That's a recipe for the rich to have all the power, but it's also a recipe for misery, political unrest, and a crappy economy.

It's a competitive world, and we're losing ground.

Click to expand...

It's only going to get worse with educational assortative marriage/mating. Educated successful people marry other educated successful people and their kids turn out to be educated successful people (generally they also have more stable marriages).

Winchester said:

It's only going to get worse with educational assortative marriage/mating. Educated successful people marry other educated successful people and their kids turn out to be educated successful people (generally they also have more stable marriages).

Click to expand...

In my family, we're Protestant and mostly college educated. My uncles wife is Catholic, and if any of them ever went to college, I never heard of it. But she was gorgeous, and that was routine back in the day, for a middle class guy to pick someone for a mate from a lower class.

Now people usually marry from the same socioeconomic background, and it's one less way to climb the proverbial ladder.

Assuming that's what you meant, of course.

late said:

In my family, we're Protestant and mostly college educated. My uncles wife is Catholic, and if any of them ever went to college, I never heard of it. But she was gorgeous, and that was routine back in the day, for a middle class guy to pick someone for a mate from a lower class.

Now people usually marry from the same socioeconomic background, and it's one less way to climb the proverbial ladder.

Assuming that's what you meant, of course.

Click to expand...

In a nutshell, yeah.

Are private schools really better than public schools?

Click to expand...

• St. Paul's Fast Facts
• Groton Fast Facts
• Exeter Fast Facts
• Middlesex Fast Facts
• St. Albans Fast Facts
• Hotchkiss Fast Facts
• Miss Porter's Fast Facts

Depends on dimensions one considers.

• Academics -- The academic content for any given class is the same. Algebra, calculus, history, English and American lit, economics, etc. don't have different content at regardless of where one goes to school. Indeed, among students who, by high school, performed well enough to take AP classes, there's no curriculum difference because in AP classes, outcomes result from the student's effort.
• Class size -- Everything that happens in the classroom is easier is smaller classes, and here private schools have an unparalleled edge. (That edge can be attenuated, but only if taxpayers are willing to forbear doing so and policy makers actually do so.)
  • The Effectiveness of Class Size Reduction
  • The Impact of Class Size and Number of Students on Outcomes in Higher Education
• Diversity -- Diversity at top private schools is extensive these days. To wit, in my day, the student body was multifariously homogenous -- even the minority students (what few there were), and though students came from around the world, the verisimilitude in our home-life-circumstances was high. These days, as shown by the "fast facts," and on a total proportionate basis, they're slightly more diverse than public schools overall.
• Athletics and extracurriculars -- Top flight private schools, in comparison to public schools, offer unmatched range of athletic and extracurricular options. Some athletic programs -- e.g., equestrian and crew -- rarely exist in public school athletics. (The absence of crew is a major oversight as crew is, IMO, the best collaboration skills builder. )
• Character -- At the top private schools, barring academic mastery, a student's character is what matters most. The schools aim to create leaders -- be it national, state, within a discipline/profession, etc. From what I can tell, an unwavering focus on integrity, honesty, and the other positive character traits separate "run of the mill" private schools from the best ones.
  • Social -- From my and my kids' experience, students at the nation's top private schools face some challenges, but ridicule for doing well in class isn't among them. Also, kids attending high quality private schools dwell in an environment that inculcates them with the mores and mannerisms endemic of success and among demonstrably successful people.
    • Network -- The networking opportunities at top private schools is unbeatable.
  • Economics -- For students at top private schools, disparities in socioeconomic background aren't terribly apparent or important. However they got there and however their education be financed, the fact is that everyone is there, so economic status doesn't much matter.
• Economics and efficiency of becoming educated -- In superable is the fact that sending one's kid to a quality public school whereat s/he takes at least the basic AP curriculum (calculus, biology, chemistry, physics, English comp., a foreign language and history (U.S. or world)) is among the best "bang for the buck" deals one (students and parents) will may realize for the whole of one's life. Because of the economic economies of scale public schools enjoy, no private school, no matter what it offers, can even come close to matching them on this dimension. (Another ranking of public schools)

So, are private schools better? In two key ways that matter in the development of young minds, class size and variety of experience opportunities, yes. That said, were I able to send my kids to one of the country's top public schools and hadn't had a personal and household situation that required my kids to attend boarding school, I would have sent them there instead of to the schools they attended. Am I dissatisfied with the outcomes my kids achieved from their schools? Not at all.

Aberration said:

There are a whole lot of great paying skilled jobs in manufacturing being staffed by vets with electrical/electronics and people with a 2 year vocational/associates. And being one of those people with a 2 year, the only reason it’s required is because people coming out of public high school are so... unqualified.

I don’t think we should be publicly funding college because the lower schools are failing, and in the process pushing a lot of kids who aren’t cut out for college out of skilled jobs they could do.

Yet they could be. We dont need just more wood shop. We need more applied mathematics, like accounting and budgeting and taxes, we need more home ec/cooking, we need welding and fabrication, we need basic electricity, electronics and programming. At the teen years or younger.

But that would require a hard look at education and I don’t think the dominant left in education is willing to work together for solution we all think would be better.

Click to expand...

Red:
There is no soundly/cogently rational basis for thinking "the lower schools are failing" if the point of "lower schools" is to educate young people.

• The best reason to get a college degree
• 21st Century Skills
• Trends in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 1972–2009
  • The High School Graduation Rate Reaches A Record High — Again
  • High School Graduation Rates, 1911 and 2010
• 120 Years of American Education
• Today’s young adults (Millennials ages 21 to 36 in 2017) are much better educated than the Silent Generation.
  
  
  

If I were to gripe about most students who've graduated from high school in the past 30 years, it'd be that they are too indolent to apply the skills they ostensibly mastered in school, most notably reading, math, analytical and research. (After all, the point of school isn't to get grades and get out; it's to develop skills one will use for the rest of one's life.) To wit, were folks to eschew popular press and politically motivated editorials and instead read rigorously performed research (with fully exposed methodologies) about education outcomes and their consequences, people would be well enough informed that they'd too refrain from asserting that K-12 schools are failing.

Were I to ridicule K-12 public schools (school systems), I'd do so about their willingness to give high school diplomas to students who, minimally cannot and/or do not:

1. adroitly read -- i.e., read and comprehend (95% or better, instantaneously on one's first read) -- at a 11th grade reading level, and
2. dextrously and aptly apply algebraic (and simpler) theorems to the "real world," and
3. deftly and aptly apply to "real world" situations the formal logical thought processes concomitant with math and scientific analysis.

Why the hell there are people (who suffer not a diagnosed intellectual disability) "running around" with high school diplomas and who yet cannot handily do those three things is beyond me, but sure as God made little green apples, there are such folks.

Private schools, being private, can do as they will in that regard, and, at their discretion, lose their accreditation. (There are several accrediting organizations. The one I am most aware of is the CIS.) That luxury doesn't exist for public schools for they have a civic duty differing vastly from that of private schools. (Private schools are often judged by how how well they achieve the things they say they aim to achieve. That's very different from public schools because the latter have little opportunity to assert "we aim to do 'T, U, V, W and X' but not 'Y and Z.' Obviously, most parents aren't going to pay to send their kids to private schools that don't also meet or best state mandated standards, thus making for another bar private schools must hurdle.)

Aberration said:

We need more applied mathematics, like accounting and budgeting and taxes, we need more home ec/cooking, we need welding and fabrication, we need basic electricity, electronics and programming. At the teen years or younger.

But that would require a hard look at education and I don’t think the dominant left in education is willing to work together for solution we all think would be better.

Click to expand...

Red:
Accounting, including budgetary and tax accounting, is essentially applied arithmetic, along with discipline-specific theory and applications of it. Indeed, for folks having strong communication skills, who don't like math, and who want only to get a bachelor's degree but nothing beyond that, public accounting, particularly in the "Big Four" but in the second tier firms too, is among the best "deals" going.

• Going to a pricey "elite" school isn't remotely required; attending a state school in one's own state whereat the "Big 4" or second tier firms recruit is all that's needed. (One cannot be a CPA without a college degree that includes the required accounting classes, though technically, that degree doesn't have to be in accounting.)
• One'll have lined up a job before commencing one's final college semester (assuming one is on the "standard" four-year track).
• Besides one's B.S., all one needs to do is pass the CPA exam and obtain CPE credit each year. Once one passes the CPA exam and has worked as a CPA for a few years, one's academic performance becomes irrelevant. (One's score on the CPA exam, unless one aims to win the Sells award, is also irrelevant. Indeed, the most efficient use of one's time is to prepare enough to, on one's first attempt, pass with the minimum score needed. Nobody will ever care or ask about one's scores on the CPA exam.)
• The starting salary is decent and, generally, within 12 to 15 years, one can expect to make partner and command at least $300K/year. Given time and upon becoming a senior partner, one can easily ~$800K+.

Not bad at all for having just a bachelor's degree and having a mastery of math no more complicated than arithmetic. (Even better paying business careers such as I-banking also use very easy math. I bankers and accountants are abetted by doing simple arithmetic -- 135 x 18, or any other number times or divided by multiples of four and six -- very quickly in their heads, but it's not necessary.)


The area of math in which most students/people are, BMO, deficient is the application of the rigorous structured logical thinking that is the primary thing one needs to master in math classes and being applying the concepts, not the computational techniques,[SUP]1[/SUP] of math to the "real world. Sure there are professions[SUP]2[/SUP] and life situations[SUP]3[/SUP] that bid one to apply the simplest (high school) of algebraic and geometric techniques, but that's about as much computational math ability as most folks need.


Endnotes:

1. Aside from structured reasoning skills, the most useful math is taught in calculus (never mind that computationally speaking, it's easier than is algebra II/trig); however, for some reason, school systems have a normatively negative view about requiring it to obtain a high school diploma. To be sure, the more math concepts one understands, the easier it is to "make sense" of the world. That said, calculus is enough for most things.
   
   Aside:
   FWIW, math is something of a "roller coaster" discipline. It starts easy (arith and algebra), then it gets hard (geometry and algebra II), then gets easy (calculus, except maybe multivariable calc), then it gets hard again (abstract algebra and anything else that requires one to develop a ton of proofs.)). The cool thing about math -- the thing that bids to make it easy -- is that the properties that one is taught in arithmetic and in the first part of algebra (HS) just keep repeating themselves over and over, but in different applications; thus if one truly "got it" in "chapter 1," so to speak, the rest all follows from it. The thing is that much of what is in chapter 1 (especially algebra) is of little to no import until one gets to the hard courses.
2. Science (particularly research), engineering, economics, and business/financial analysis (stat mostly), are some.
3. Is the case of 12 oz. cans a better deal than the 2-liter bottle?
   Does the price difference between, say, Costco and the gas station around the corner merit my driving to Costco to get gas?
   Graduate degree quantitative analysis.

Skeptic Bob said:

It is very difficult to compare the effectiveness of private schools to public schools. Public schools have to take in everyone. Private schools can be picky about who they admit. So before private schools ever even teach the kids a thing they are starting off with a group of kids who are more academically capable.

Click to expand...

That's probably often so among secular private schools. It's sometimes so for parochial schools. It need not at all be so for theologically "fundamentalist"[SUP]1[/SUP] (something other than Episcopal, Jesuit or Quaker) schools at any grade level. To wit, on the rankings of the nations top private schools, one has to go around a thousand or more places down on a list of top private schools before one encounters the non Episcopal, Jesuit or Quaker Christian school. (Strangely, that Christian school listing places the 3,538th ranked school from the "all private schools" list ahead of a school that appears as 117th on the "all private schools list." I wouldn't mention it were the two relatively closely rated by the two ranking groups. But that they're not indicates there's something the Christian folks value more than student academic outcomes, teaching quality, extracurricular programs, etc.)


Note:

1. FWIW, to my mind, "fundamentalist" schools are ones that require students to worship in accordance with the school's associated faith-based belief system. For instance, my alma mater is Episcopal, but students there, Episcopal or otherwise, need to exercise spirituality of some stripe, but none are expected/required to believe and ascribe to any particular faith-based belief system. (An outright atheist student/family probably wouldn't send their kid(s) to my alma mater, but there are plenty of comparable secular alternatives, so that's hardly a problem.)

late said:

In my family, we're Protestant and mostly college educated. My uncles wife is Catholic, and if any of them ever went to college, I never heard of it. But she was gorgeous, and that was routine back in the day, for a middle class guy to pick someone for a mate from a lower class.

Now people usually marry from the same socioeconomic background, and it's one less way to climb the proverbial ladder.

Assuming that's what you meant, of course.

Click to expand...

Red:
That's, well, different.....I don't know what else to think of it...but, for now, I'll take your word for it.

Boo Radley said:

Valid point. And if you look at methods, public schools are more often more creative. Private schools large do little to nothign different.

Click to expand...

Red:
Really?

• How To Bring This Private School Teaching Method Into A Public School Classroom
• Addressing Classroom Challenges With the Harkness Method
• Harkness Moves to Public Schools

I'm inclined to think the pedagogical leadership flows the opposite direction and that the aim of public schools administrations and boards of education is to adopt methods that have, at private schools, been shown to be successful. (A simple way to fix the woes of U.S. public schooling -- Has the nation the will to make it happen?)

Helix said:

depends on the school. my parents both dedicated their lives to being public school teachers, and my wife has taught at both public and private schools. i graduated from a public school, and got a great education. my wife has taught at both, and my impression is that the private school didn't treat her nearly as well. this makes sense, as they have to skim the money from somewhere. i don't support using public money for private schools except in extreme circumstances. i also don't support creating those extreme circumstances so that public money can go to for-profit schools.

Click to expand...

Red:
That may in some instances be so. Whether and how much a school has to "skim money from somewhere," depends on the school's endowment, which is wherefrom they are supposed to "skim." The average endowment of private schools varies by region, ranging from just under $9M to $35M, though to be sure, some (the best private schools) have far more, and others far less, than those averages.


Other:
I think folks -- some folks here and perhaps folks in general -- have the misguided notion that any private school is better than a public school. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There's the objective performance/outcome measures any specific private school has and there is the matter of the environment at the school[SUP]1[/SUP]. There is also the financing aspect. And there are, of course, emotional and individual factors. To wit:

• Objective -- It is pointless to send one's kid to a private school just to do so when the private school one can afford is, provided one's kid is committed to doing well in school, not materially better than the local public schools from which one may choose. For example, one'd need to have a incredibly compelling reasons -- something one's kid wants/needs simply isn't offered, for example -- to send one's kid to just about any D.C. area private school if one's child can attend TJ or George Mason high Schools. (Ditto a host of other public schools/areas around the country.)
  • Kids having manifestly special needs may also be better served by private schools that cater to them. (That one's kid is too lazy to do the work s/he needs to do to excel isn't a special need. That's called needing better parenting and discipline.)
• Emotional examples (there are too many to enumerate):
  • One requires that one's kid educated in a specific theistic setting. Well, one must pick a private school.
  • One wants one's kids to attend one's alma mater for some sort of "legacy" reason(s).
  • One's professional obligations/situation militate(s) for it.

Some private schools are better than nearly all other schools (public or private). Some private schools in a given area are better than the public schools in the same area. Some private schools are, at least objectively speaking, are no better than the public schools in the same area, and some of them are worse.

Given how many private schools there are in the U.S., I don't think one can credibly make a national-level generalization about one genre of school being better or worse than the other. I think on a city or county level, one can more accurately make such generalizations. For example, in D.C. the public schools are "okay enough" that a strong performing graduate of them will have no trouble getting admitted to a good college, but they're not good enough the "osmosis" or the "higher bar" effects are in play.[SUP]2[/SUP] So, in D.C., yes, private schools are almost always better than the public schools from which one may choose. (Right across the city line in MD or VA, it's a wholly different story.)



Note:

1. Keeping in mind that some public schools are so large that they have, for lack of a better term, "microenvironments" and one's kid is going to become part of one, maybe a couple or three of them, but otherwise have few to no encounters with the remainder of them...something that at a small private school is all but impossible to have occur...
2. D.C. doesn't have a high quality "state" university/college; thus if one's a poor D.C. resident, unless one's kid can earn a "full pop" (tuition, books, fees, transportation, room and board) scholarship (or collection of scholarships) somewhere, one's likely better off moving to MD or VA if one wants to remain in the D.C. area, because it doesn't make sense to be "dirt poor" and force one's kid into a position of having to risk taking $30K+ in loans to attend a pricey private college/university when UVA and UMCP are fine and very affordable schools.

Aberration said:

Don’t need to. We can actually just quit teach stupid **** and focus on what is actually necessary.

Click to expand...

So what's 'stupid ****'?

Xelor said:

Red:
That may in some instances be so. Whether and how much a school has to "skim money from somewhere," depends on the school's endowment, which is wherefrom they are supposed to "skim." The average endowment of private schools varies by region, ranging from just under $9M to $35M, though to be sure, some (the best private schools) have far more, and others far less, than those averages.

Click to expand...

the solution that i prefer is a redesign of the public schools that are failing. i don't care if a private school makes a profit, but a lot of the voucher thing is just a tool to help Republicans to push struggling public schools over the financial edge.

as for where they skim from, from my experience, it's the employees. my wife moved from a private to a public school in a well funded area three years ago. she was doing about twice as much work at the private school, and they shuffled her between four classrooms a day. the curriculum at her current school is designed in a better way that has reduced the hours and hours of homework so that she has time to volunteer to coach and lead other extra curricular activities. also, she has union representation, and even though Republicans have gutted unions here pretty effectively, hers still has a little bit of pull. she's basically in a much better situation at work than she was previously.

sorry, had to cleave part of your quoted post due to the character limit. i did read it, though.

Helix said:

the solution that i prefer is a redesign of the public schools that are failing. i don't care if a private school makes a profit, but a lot of the voucher thing is just a tool to help Republicans to push struggling public schools over the financial edge.

as for where they skim from, from my experience, it's the employees. my wife moved from a private to a public school in a well funded area three years ago. she was doing about twice as much work at the private school, and they shuffled her between four classrooms a day. the curriculum at her current school is designed in a better way that has reduced the hours and hours of homework so that she has time to volunteer to coach and lead other extra curricular activities. also, she has union representation, and even though Republicans have gutted unions here pretty effectively, hers still has a little bit of pull. she's basically in a much better situation at work than she was previously.

sorry, had to cleave part of your quoted post due to the character limit. i did read it, though.

Click to expand...

Red:
I don't recall whether I've shared this before, but I think the voucher thing is more about boosting the fortunes/enrollments at parochial and other fundamentalist Christian schools than it is about education quality. I did some research on that notion. I'll try to dig it up and share it here in another post.


Blue:
NP. I understand. TY for mentioning it, and more importantly, for reading it.

Grand Mal said:

So what's 'stupid ****'?

Click to expand...

Things that the majority of Americans don’t need to know to have a decent life. Yeah there is an argument for a more liberal education. Maybe when we can afford and master teaching the basics first.