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.
To many people this is precisely the appeal of private schools, the ability to have their kids with more motivated peers.
I wouldn't say the peers are necessarily that motivated, although the parents are. Many people send their kids to private schools to "straighten them out". I know of several cases personally. The same is true of some public charter schools that supposedly focus on "high academics". I have a co-worker who is on the board of such a charter school, and he says there are some messed up kids there (his words, not mine!).
It's also a reason the two systems (general public schools v private schools) can't be compared.
Many people send their kids to private schools to "straighten them out".
In both our kids' parochial high schools and my nieces and nephews' private secular schools, the students who needed straightening out were gone after their first offense.
I think you're right about not being able to compare public and private schools, though, due to the differences in the average student at each.
"Teachers are told to appeal to "multiple intelligences" in their classrooms."
Yes, Howard Gardner and his Theory of Multiple Intelligences, the theory that says we should allow the musical students to compose a song about Romeo and Juliet, while the other students make a poster or build a model of the Globe Theatre.
Recent brain research shows that the complex abilities apparent in individual kids are reflected on the inside, as well as the outside. Parts of the brain involved in reading, math, music, and personal relationships are different -- larger or smaller, more or less active -- in every child. These circuits are independent, so even if a child struggles in one domain, like reading, he may have a neurological advantage in others. And perhaps most surprising, scientists have established that learning and practicing certain skills can cause the corresponding brain areas to morph and grow. In other words, by helping a child hone her abilities, you can actually change her brain.
Quote:
"One should not think of intelligence as a single thing that's fixed and that nothing can be done about," says Michael Posner, founding director of Cornell University's Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychology and now a professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Oregon. "Just as there are multiple individual differences in different areas, there are ways of training these different brain networks, and that might change the brain processes underlying them."
In musicians who play stringed instruments, for instance, the brain areas that affect the fingers of the left hand are larger than other people's. This effect, described in Science magazine in 1995, is strongest for the four fingers -- which do the bulk of the work manipulating the strings of, say, a violin -- and weakest for the thumb. The earlier in life each musician had started to play, the more distinct were the differences in those parts of the brain.
Scientists have seen evidence like this for mental, not just physical tasks. In studies with strong implications for school, Shaywitz, codirector of the Yale Center for Dyslexia & Creativity, has shown that teaching can alter the brains of disabled readers. She and colleagues spent a year helping children with reading disabilities build their phonological skills. Afterward, the children's reading improved, and fMRI pictures showed that activity in parts of their brains crucial for reading had jumped.
This is not to say that we should only teach to a child's strengths. In fact, by building on weaknesses, we may change their brains. It is true, however, that different children learn best in different ways and that using all the modalities of learning will help all the children.
Since I don't have any kids or grand kids and it has been a long time since I went to public school, I would like to know the percentage of private school kids versus public school kids that have to take remedial classes in their freshman year of college because their public/private schools grade inflated them. I wonder if that data is out there somewhere.
percent of private school graduates taking a remedial class or classes in their freshman year of college.
percent of public school graduates taking a remedial class or classes in their freshman year of college.
Since I don't have any kids or grand kids and it has been a long time since I went to public school, I would like to know the percentage of private school kids versus public school kids that have to take remedial classes in their freshman year of college because their public/private schools grade inflated them. I wonder if that data is out there somewhere.
percent of private school graduates taking a remedial class or classes in their freshman year of college.
percent of public school graduates taking a remedial class or classes in their freshman year of college.
It doesn't matter. They are two different groups of students!
It doesn't matter. They are two different groups of students!
She is asking the question, obviously it matters to her or she wouldn't be asking the question. What difference does it make if they are two different groups of students. You can differeniate since they can from different background, the same as if you compared them to students who were home schooled.
Some studies have shown a link between this trait and activity in certain parts of the brain. The new research doesn't disprove this, nor does it prove Howard Gardner's theory that we in fact have multiple intelligences. (The idea of "intelligence" is too subjective to be proven.)
. . . What does all this mean for educators? First, a caution: Neuroscientists insist there is no concrete proof that certain teaching practices are best for the brain.
I think a better comparison of the quality of education is not in comparing where the top kids go to college but in comparing where the middle kids go to college. The top kids are going to do well and go to the same type of schools no matter where they go to high school. It's the middle range kids that benefit from an advanced curriculum, etc.
I think a better comparison of the quality of education is not in comparing where the top kids go to college but in comparing where the middle kids go to college. The top kids are going to do well and go to the same type of schools no matter where they go to high school. It's the middle range kids that benefit from an advanced curriculum, etc.
She is asking the question, obviously it matters to her or she wouldn't be asking the question. What difference does it make if they are two different groups of students. You can differeniate since they can from different background, the same as if you compared them to students who were home schooled.
Actually, you need to look at two groups of students who are identical with respect to everything except private vs public education to get a meaningful answer. Good luck with that!
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.
