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.
The perceived quality of a community's school system has a huge impact on property values. What do you consider to be the best school district in the State? I have compiled a list that includes Hollis/Brookline, Bedford, Bow, Exeter, Durham, Hopkinton, and Hanover. What is your experience with schools in NH?
Depends who you listen to and what matters more - positive but subjective feedback from families, or objective test scores and statistics that may not give you the full picture. Based on scores and objective criteria, the "best" school districts in NH when we looked a few years ago were Hanover, Hollis, Bedford, Bow, and Amherst. Hollis was ranked the "best" in the state by Newsweek based on the % of kids taking AP classes. They also ranked Moultonborough and Hopkinton highly. Exeter, Durham and Londonderry are three towns that don't rank as highly on paper but seem to have highly involved and enthusiastic communities. Amherst ranks really well but has a lot of detractors.
We have had a very good experience with the Amherst School system. The main topic of any negative comments is the high school which has non-traditional approach. This works for most students and is excellent preparation for college but students that are not motivated do not do well.
Looking at the rankings on the great school site, Hollis has a 10 and Amherst a 9. The student teacher ratio at Hollis is 14:1 and at Souhegan 11:1.
I was in the doc's office this morning and saw the cover story in a recent edition of "Hippo" asking whether more money means smarter kids. They posted how much each all the towns spend on each student. It was interesting that Bedford spends less than Amherst, Hollis, Londonderry and Bow, and has slightly larger class sizes, but has better test scores. One point of interest to me was that not all of the towns in NH have their own HS. Some only have their own elementary school. The article was long, and I'm not doing it justice by posting just a few of their points, but if you can find the magazine (it's a freebie at most grocery stores) with the cover article, it's a good read. It does talk about the many things that go into making a good district, but that money IS a major factor.
I think money is a huge factor, but not in the way we usually think. Demographics make a huge difference; wealthy parents tend to be well-educated parents. Well-educated parents tend to want their kids to be well-educated, to expose them to learning experiences like books and museums early and often, and to get invested in their children's educations. Consequently, schools with affluent student bodies tend to produce high scores. This reflects the demographics of the student body more than anything "better" about the school itself.
On the other hand, throwing money at students whose parents are unwilling or unable to help, who don't get involved with the schools, who don't read to their kids, who don't make sure the kids do their homework, who don't have the skills to help their kids learn to think logically and clearly, is no panacea. We tend to think it is, and so the school districts that spend the most per pupil are often the worst. For example, inner-city school districts tend to spend a lot per pupil and have terrible outcomes. Conversely, parochial schools in the same districts spend very little per pupil and get much better results. They have a lot of advantages that public school systems can't match (ability to expel students, dedicated and subsidized teachers, permission to teach character and morality).
Fancy art studios, computers, swim teams etc are great, but they're only the icing on the cake.
OK, that's my tangent...this is one of my hot-button issues
"Ninety percent of Bedford’s students scored proficient or better on the NECAP in reading and 86 percent scored at least proficient in math. In Manchester, students came in at 56 percent and 45 percent respectively. In Nashua, 71 percent of students scored proficient or better in reading and 61 percent of students scored at least proficient in math. Conversely, 88 percent of students in Hollis scored at least proficient in both math and reading. Amherst students also scored well, 86 percent proficient in reading and 82 percent proficient in math."
It was interesting that Bedford spends less than Amherst, Hollis, Londonderry and Bow, and has slightly larger class sizes, but has better test scores.
Depends on the level. Bedford high school spends 15,186.61 per student per year. Amherst (Souhegan; Amherst and Mont Vernon) spends 14,481.46 per student per year. Bedford does spend much less for K - 8.
Depends on the level. Bedford high school spends 15,186.61 per student per year. Amherst (Souhegan; Amherst and Mont Vernon) spends 14,481.46 per student per year. Bedford does spend much less for K - 8.
Ah, thank you. I thought the article had pretty good detail, but it's nice to take it farther! The Hippo article listed Bedford as spending closer to $10K per student. Is that number an average of grades k-12 then? I'm assuming (perhaps wrongly) that Bedford spends more at the HS level because of the IB program, which is supposed to be rather expensive.
On the other hand, throwing money at students whose parents are unwilling or unable to help, who don't get involved with the schools, who don't read to their kids, who don't make sure the kids do their homework, who don't have the skills to help their kids learn to think logically and clearly, is no panacea.
Which explains a lot of why the Baltimore schools are constantly getting more and more money thrown at it, yet they remain some of the worst schools in the state - and had a number of the taken over a couple of years ago.
Yes, money can help, but it's not the deciding factor. a kid can excell if they want to no matter what the environment is. it just takes work.
I think money is a huge factor, but not in the way we usually think. Demographics make a huge difference; wealthy parents tend to be well-educated parents. Well-educated parents tend to want their kids to be well-educated, to expose them to learning experiences like books and museums early and often, and to get invested in their children's educations. Consequently, schools with affluent student bodies tend to produce high scores. This reflects the demographics of the student body more than anything "better" about the school itself.
How then, do kids in NH compare to - say - kids in Beverly Hills? I don't buy the Wealthy = Well Educated = Kids-with-good-grades connection. Donald Trump = Moron = Ivana Trump.
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.
