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.
I've read somewhere that Beurling is low on the rankings because, in part, it caters to disadvantaged youth of the area as well, along with its IB program. Sort of James Lyng school, who definitely resent these rankings. They work with disadvantaged and problem kids, and do a great job.
I don't want to be too harsh but that's really not a good score. Other schools that I know better than Beurling have their clientele-related challenges as well but have scored higher and also shown impressive improvements over the years.
Of course, this does not mean that a child can't get a good education at Beurling. But for me personally a school with that low a ranking would not be my first choice.
I don't want to be too harsh but that's really not a good score. Other schools that I know better than Beurling have their clientele-related challenges as well but have scored higher and also shown impressive improvements over the years.
Of course, this does not mean that a child can't get a good education at Beurling. But for me personally a school with that low a ranking would not be my first choice.
Well I take the whole Fraser rankings idea with a grain of salt:
1. I don't know about their methodology, for all I know they just appear out of nowhere with gradation. Do they review the grades from their ivory towers? Do they visit schools and talk to the kids and the teachers? (highly unlikely).
2. As it was discussed, the money can influence reports.
3. I personally went to the highly-ranked private schools in Montreal during open door days. Not to be harsh, but there is no difference in the ambiance or materials. (plus-minus ipads). The teachers are of the same species, humans, with their pluses and minuses.
4. I hold in high regard people who devote themselves to working with disadvantaged youth, in disadvantaged areas. "If not them, then who?". My internal gradation puts them on the same level as that of the highly accomplished schools.
5. Some school's purpose is to accommodate kids with learning disabilities.
6. Because of 4 and 5 above, it seems to me silly to be comparing schools so vastly different in their objectives. OK, let's compare school A who sieves through all the kids to chose the brightest and the richest, with school B who doesn't have a sieve, to school C who works with delinquents, and with school D who works with autistic kids. What do we have as a result? School A is better on the paper!! Yay!!
7. Artificially propped school A attracts more "moneyed people", they sieve the kids again, the cycle repeats.
8. Is there really any perceived difference between kids from private and public schools, when they grow up and meet at a university? How can it be quantified? Are some kids $100,000 "better" than the others (5 years $20K a year)?
Well I take the whole Fraser rankings idea with a grain of salt:
1. I don't know about their methodology, for all I know they just appear out of nowhere with gradation. Do they review the grades from their ivory towers? Do they visit schools and talk to the kids and the teachers? (highly unlikely).
2. As it was discussed, the money can influence reports.
3. I personally went to the highly-ranked private schools in Montreal during open door days. Not to be harsh, but there is no difference in the ambiance or materials. (plus-minus ipads). The teachers are of the same species, humans, with their pluses and minuses.
4. I hold in high regard people who devote themselves to working with disadvantaged youth, in disadvantaged areas. "If not them, then who?". My internal gradation puts them on the same level as that of the highly accomplished schools.
5. Some school's purpose is to accommodate kids with learning disabilities.
6. Because of 4 and 5 above, it seems to me silly to be comparing schools so vastly different in their objectives. OK, let's compare school A who sieves through all the kids to chose the brightest and the richest, with school B who doesn't have a sieve, to school C who works with delinquents, and with school D who works with autistic kids. What do we have as a result? School A is better on the paper!! Yay!!
7. Artificially propped school A attracts more "moneyed people", they sieve the kids again, the cycle repeats.
8. Is there really any perceived difference between kids from private and public schools, when they grow up and meet at a university? How can it be quantified? Are some kids $100,000 "better" than the others (5 years $20K a year)?
Well, child-rearing is not an exact science. There is nothing 100% certain. In choosing a highly-ranked school, public or private, you're simply putting better odds on your side. This does not mean that a child who goes to a lower ranked school can't be successful. Many (maybe most) of them are.
Yes, those special programs exist for a reason and they do a lot of good but in my view if your child doesn't need them it's not always in their best interest to be in a school where so much of the focus and resources are placed on that as opposed to other stuff like enriched programs, etc.
Finally, as I mentioned there are no absolutes but I do occasionally do hiring and while it's not everyone, people who went to these private schools do occupy a higher proportion of upper-level positions relative to how many of them there are actually out there. It's not something we typically ask for when hiring but it eventually comes out after a while once the person is settled in the workplace.
Though I agree with you on most of the points having myself schooled in very poorly rated school because of circumstances. That did not hamper my progress and eventually I got into better college and university. But it may or may not happen to everyone else. I certainly believe that had I been to better school and surrounded with brighter students I would have progressed further and enhanced my career further. Competitive environment help you excel beyond your potential. In poor competitive environment you tend not to put that much hard work.
I know someone whose son was in Beurling IB program 2-3 years back(they moved here from US and now moved back). Having interacted with the kid I can say for sure that kid was bright. But he struggled in subject that were taught in French, especially science. His parents got worried and visited principal few times to request for extended classes to catch up. He was perfectly fine with the subjects but he was lost in translation most of the time. School actually shunned them off and asked them to move their kid into regular english program(IB is bilingual ).
I also came to know from him that 9t/10th grade students smoked cigarettes/weed and some into drugs. This is something really worrisome . Of course kids can get into that in any environment and there is no guarantee but I still believe that surrounding matters a lot. Kids coming to school from what background etc. etc. I hear that quite a few students arrive from extremely poor areas of town as well. In high school peer pressure does work at times especially bad habits .
Anyway this is more of a problem during the later period of the school and 7-9th grade should be quite okay in any school but I am just stating what I learnt in my recent research.
"Beurling Academy is located a "red zone," where student graduation rates are the lowest on the island of Montreal."
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuala
Well I take the whole Fraser rankings idea with a grain of salt:
1. I don't know about their methodology, for all I know they just appear out of nowhere with gradation. Do they review the grades from their ivory towers? Do they visit schools and talk to the kids and the teachers? (highly unlikely).
2. As it was discussed, the money can influence reports.
3. I personally went to the highly-ranked private schools in Montreal during open door days. Not to be harsh, but there is no difference in the ambiance or materials. (plus-minus ipads). The teachers are of the same species, humans, with their pluses and minuses.
4. I hold in high regard people who devote themselves to working with disadvantaged youth, in disadvantaged areas. "If not them, then who?". My internal gradation puts them on the same level as that of the highly accomplished schools.
5. Some school's purpose is to accommodate kids with learning disabilities.
6. Because of 4 and 5 above, it seems to me silly to be comparing schools so vastly different in their objectives. OK, let's compare school A who sieves through all the kids to chose the brightest and the richest, with school B who doesn't have a sieve, to school C who works with delinquents, and with school D who works with autistic kids. What do we have as a result? School A is better on the paper!! Yay!!
7. Artificially propped school A attracts more "moneyed people", they sieve the kids again, the cycle repeats.
8. Is there really any perceived difference between kids from private and public schools, when they grow up and meet at a university? How can it be quantified? Are some kids $100,000 "better" than the others (5 years $20K a year)?
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.
. 
