Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What's the big deal? It's no secret that you get what you pay for. Nobody will be more aware of this reality than a public school teacher. In fact you'd expect them to be more likely than the average person to do this, knowing what they know.
If they don't feel they are doing well at their job and have no respect for it, then they need to find another job. Your post is a little too generalizing and it appears you just hate public schools.
Ok. Can I ask YOU why you chose a private school? I'm not being standoffish, I genuinely am curious. Is it because the public schools are bad? That seems to be a reason for most private school parents (parochial parent mostly) I know but they are totally wrong about the public school. Mostly they heard "bad" things that weren't true, they just assume private schools are bad, or just have snobby reasons. So yes, I can be defensive I guess.
We actually homeschool.
I have personal experience with the public high schools, though, and the work that the kids are given is just not appropriate for their grade levels (think word searches, coloring pictures, etc... and no, I'm not exaggerating!). There are also several fights per day. Basically, lots of wasted time, and my teens have other things they could be spending that time on. I'm not assuming anything; I know that these things are true from first-hand experience.
If I worked at the school, which I do not, I could see parents questioning why my kids didn't go to school there, but I would not, of course, be in the position to tell them anything. For them to assume that it's because I didn't want my children mingling with those of other races or whatever would be ridiculous. The principal of the school surely knows the reality of the school. She's not basing her choices off of assumptions or hearsay, right? So either there's something that she doesn't want her kids exposed to (which could be large class sizes, a particular type of curriculum, or something more insidious, like kids of a certain race/SES), or the Catholic school offers something more (which might just be the religious component of the education).
There's really no option other than to accept that other parents make different decisions for their children... if questioned, I'm sure the answer given would be, "this is just what works best for our family." If you feel confident that the school is good and your own kids are doing well, then you have nothing to worry about.
Oh, one more point: One teacher or one administrator is not able to change the face of public education. Someone could be doing his or her very best and still not make much of a difference. So it's not a matter of the principal not sending her children there because she feels that she does a poor job administrating; I'm pretty sure most teachers and administrators would love to make changes, but they're not allowed to just do what they want willy-nilly. They have to follow district/state rules.
I have personal experience with the public high schools, though, and the work that the kids are given is just not appropriate for their grade levels (think word searches, coloring pictures, etc... and no, I'm not exaggerating!). There are also several fights per day. Basically, lots of wasted time, and my teens have other things they could be spending that time on. I'm not assuming anything; I know that these things are true from first-hand experience.
If I worked at the school, which I do not, I could see parents questioning why my kids didn't go to school there, but I would not, of course, be in the position to tell them anything. For them to assume that it's because I didn't want my children mingling with those of other races or whatever would be ridiculous. The principal of the school surely knows the reality of the school. She's not basing her choices off of assumptions or hearsay, right? So either there's something that she doesn't want her kids exposed to (which could be large class sizes, a particular type of curriculum, or something more insidious, like kids of a certain race/SES), or the Catholic school offers something more (which might just be the religious component of the education).
There's really no option other than to accept that other parents make different decisions for their children... if questioned, I'm sure the answer given would be, "this is just what works best for our family." If you feel confident that the school is good and your own kids are doing well, then you have nothing to worry about.
Oh, one more point: One teacher or one administrator is not able to change the face of public education. Someone could be doing his or her very best and still not make much of a difference. So it's not a matter of the principal not sending her children there because she feels that she does a poor job administrating; I'm pretty sure most teachers and administrators would love to make changes, but they're not allowed to just do what they want willy-nilly. They have to follow district/state rules.
Fair enough. But the catholic school is actually the one with large class sizes. Yes there are fights at my kids school, but it's not hard to stay away from them. By high shool, the kids are separated by ability. I haven't seen his workload or learning hindered by others. I can't say his time is wasted any more than any other high school kid will whine about that.
As for the coloring and word searches, well that's crazy and it's up to the taxpayers to hold the schools accountable. I think schools actually need parents like you to keep the schools up to par. I'm still having trouble accepting (obviously ) that she can expose herself to these kids, but won't allow her kids to be exposed to that. If this is the case, than why as an administrator is she not doing something about what she doesn't like. My God, do any principals take ownership of their buildings anymore? (Ok that's another thread...sorry)
I would have NEVER let my kid go to one of the inner city schools I used to teach at. I had kindergarten and first graders who had siblings/parents in gangs. They knew more about illegal drugs than I did as an adult. Many dropped out by ninth grade. My last year at one school, I was pregnant and a six year old student hit my stomach and said she wanted my baby to die.
If I was required to send my child to the same school, I would not have taught there. Someone may be a great teacher and want to improve the public schools and not want their child to attend the school.
I doubt the manager of McDonalds eats there all the time. It's a job. Period. The vast majority of people work and treat it like a job. It's not some moral declaration of anything.
Why are teachers held to this strange ideal that not many other professions are ? We are supposed to be more moral, helpful, self sacrificing, happy with our lot, flexible, be open to every parent or student, and do our job to make the world a better place.
How about we just want to do our job and try our best? Why all the moral stuff? Why does a banker just do his/her job and not be expected to do it out of the goodness of their hearts? Seriously, that's BS.
We already have tons of government interference, red tape, lots of legal issues, excessive use of private time to do our job, low pay, and not much support from parents or administrators. Let's lay off the moral judgements, please.
I think it depends on the public schools in the teacher's area and how they're zoned. Maybe the teacher lives in a sketchy area. Maybe the zoning rules in her neighborhood would send her child to a less desirable school. Maybe she has strong religious values that she wants to pass onto her child and they cannot be reinforced in a public school.
I don't think her job requires her to send her child to a public school. Do all Toyota employees drive them?
That's the thing. I think type of schooling wouldn't matter one way or another for her kids. Yet she sends the message that minority children and poor to middle class children are not for her kids.
Seems like you have something against this one individual. Why do you care where she sends her kids?
I'd also like to know how exactly she "sends the message" about minority and poor children. Is the simple act of sending her kids to private school "sending a message" or has she spoken out about minorities being bad? FYI there are plenty of minority kids at most private schools in the year 2015.
Let's say a nurse gets a horrible disease and has the option to either use the hospital they work at or another hospital. As a nurse, do theyhave a moral obligation to use their own hospital? Should people judge them for not doing that?
It doesn't matter why they choose a different hospital. Maybe, it's closer to home. Maybe, they like a specific doctor there. Maybe, they don't want everyone at the hospital to know their business. Maybe, they feel uncomfortable getting a second opinion.
It doesn't mean they aren't a good nurse. It means they are making a choice that has nothing to do with their job. They are making a personal choice. It's the same thing with teachers.
Let's say a nurse get a horrible disease and theycan either use the hospital they work at or another hospital. As a nurse, do theyhave a moral obligation to use their own hospital? Should people judge them for not doing that?
It doesn't matter why they choose a different hospital. Maybe, it's closer to home. Maybe, they like a specific doctor there. Maybe, they don't want everyone at the hospital to know their business. Maybe, they feel uncomfortable getting a second opinion.
It doesn't mean they aren't a good nurse. It means they are making a choice that has nothing to do with their job. They are making a personal choice. It's the same thing with teachers.
I go to the hospital we are closer to and/or where my pediatrician is out of. I also don't live in the area of the hospital I work at and I don't tell people I don't use it because the other one is terrible. Hospitals actually work in conjuction with each other when it comes to the patient (ie one might not be a truama center, one might have more resources for cancer, etc.). Given that many people send their kids to private schools because they don't want their kids around certain elements, I'd say it's a different story.
I go to the hospital we are closer to and/or where my pediatrician is out of. I also don't live in the area of the hospital I work at and I don't tell people I don't use it because the other one is terrible. Hospitals actually work in conjuction with each other when it comes to the patient (ie one might not be a truama center, one might have more resources for cancer, etc.). Given that many people send their kids to private schools because they don't want their kids around certain elements, I'd say it's a different story.
Wait...you DON'T use your own hospital! The horror!
So, you just proved my own point. You have your own PERSONAL reasons to not frequent your own place of work. How about you give teachers the benefit of the doubt?
It doesn't matter why she doesn't send her kids to public schools. It has zero impact on her ability to teach or be an admin. Just like your performance as a nurse has nothing to do with where you get your health care needs met.
We had one principal who sent their kids to a different campus. We all breathed a sigh of relief, because that kid was a hell raiser. The admin felt it was better for the staff, her kid, and herself for the child to attend somewhere else. It was actually at a great and coveted campus in the burbs. She actually sent him to a lower rated campus, due to her own personal reasons. Great admin, BTW.
Last edited by Meyerland; 11-16-2015 at 10:00 AM..
Seems like you have something against this one individual. Why do you care where she sends her kids?
I'd also like to know how exactly she "sends the message" about minority and poor children. Is the simple act of sending her kids to private school "sending a message" or has she spoken out about minorities being bad? FYI there are plenty of minority kids at most private schools in the year 2015.
I'm aware. Many people fear public schools irrationally. But yes, I do think she sends the message. When high performing poor kids and/or very good athletes somehow end up at her kids' school even though the funds aren't there, you wonder who put that in action.
As for anything against her, I'd say no. I've known her for a long time. She was a decent teacher. But I do see the situation as her thinking her work isn't good enough. I can say that about every public school teacher I know who sent their kids to private school. I dont' compare kids to cars or any other factory. Either you believe in public ed, or you don't.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) that she can expose herself to these kids, but won't allow her kids to be exposed to that. If this is the case, than why as an administrator is she not doing something about what she doesn't like. My God, do any principals take ownership of their buildings anymore? (Ok that's another thread...sorry)
