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.
No we need better teachers who do more than stand in front of a classroom and proctor a test.
Hate to break this to you, not everyone is a good test taker.
if they arent a good test taker, then they havent learned the content required to pass the test. im not really sure how else you can make sure someone has learned without testing them. but im all for improving the quality of the tests. but its gotta be tests.
i dont think we need better teachers. maybe we need better instructions on how exactly a teacher should teach. im fine with them just standing in front of a class and lecturing. i dont really know whats going on in every class to judge and i dont want to. ultimately, its the students obligation to do well. thats why i like standardized tests as well, you arent subject to the whim of a teacher.
Last edited by CaptainNJ; 01-15-2013 at 03:05 PM..
Those things are all wonderful if you can find them, but the average private school isn't going to offer those things either. You obviously were willing to pay for a top-flight private school education. I'm a fan of "classical" education and that sounds like the model you preferred for your kids, but at the end of the day were your kids actually "better" then their public school counterparts, at least in terms of actual academic achievement/knowledge?
Private school generally means Catholic school in most areas and frankly, they offer a poorer education and far less resources then what you can find in most good suburban schools. Catholic schools basically exist off of slightly wealthier people who live in poorer areas and don't want to send their kids to a poor public school and people who are die hard Catholics. Outside of that, you have a handful of small private schools that cater to the elementary level, but the quality of them is very variable. Beyond that you get into the "academy" style private schools, like the Friend's schools I mentioned. Yes, I think kids who go to Moorestown Friend's (sister school to Sidwell Friend's where the President sends his kids) get an exceptional education. That education also costs $20k+ a year, meaning only the wealthy can even remotely consider affording it and the school can be selective in whom they admit.
For the average NJ'ian the education accessible at their local public school is just as good, if not better then what they can receive at an affordable private school.
Ok if you are talking about religious schools then I agree...
If you are talking about real private schools then the difference is tremendous. Even, I'm afraid, when compared to top notch public schools.
i think this is a great move for people who want that big school name but dont want to pay full price. you end up with the same degree.
Hey, we're agreeing on something again, lol.
Quote:
im surprised you are the same age as me, i would have thought you were older than me.
I get that all the time. FWIW, I look older then I am as well. All the men in my family go gray early, but at least we get to keep the hair we have, lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshflakes757
I'm not suggesting that parents shell out a crap ton of money for their kids to go to private school in NJ. In other states (as I mentioned, California) it makes a lot of more sense to do so as the property taxes are lower, the public schools are more mediocre, and the tuition for private school is significantly lower as well.
I'm just not following the point of your argument. Yes, other states have lower school taxes and they also have crappier schools. In those states private education is generally considered a better option if one can afford it. Since private education is more popular, the cost tends to be lower as they aren't really competing with "free" public schools.
What's the macro point here? NJ should privatize education? We should cut public school funding so they become "crappier" and more people send their kids to private school?
Quote:
I'm stating that private/catholic school in this state is still an option -- especially for those kids with rich parents that would sink to the bottom of the ocean in a public school. At least in private school they'll have a good guidance department look out for them (regardless of intellect) and help them out getting into the most appropriate 4 year (seriously, if your kid isn't the sharpest tool in the shed and you have money, this is a safe bet.)
Of course it's an option, but it also ignores the fact that schools like Millburn and Alpine might as well be "private" schools because there is a hell of a cost barrier for entry.
The schtick about guidance departments is based on your personal experience, not actual facts regarding the situation in NJ. I had good guidance counselors who helped me throughout high school and my college selection process. My wife went to private school (Catholic) and she saw her guidance counselor once who basically handed her a pamphlet for county college.
I posted composite study results earlier in the thread. One of them was in regards to "future success" which was measuring the number of NJ public school students that went on to college from high school, completed college by earning their degree and then entered the workforce. NJ ranked as number two in the nation on that measure. Meaning, public schools in NJ tend to produce graduates that are able to:
a) Go on to college.
b) Complete their degree.
c) Succesfully enter the workforce.
Is that not the most basic measure of success in public education? Preparing kids to go onto higher education, earn degrees and get jobs? I think it is and in that measure, NJ is one of the best regardless of your individual poor experience.
Quote:
My point is look beyond the statistics. Yes NJ has good public schools (whoop de frigging do) but the districts have a certain agenda and it's called "teaching the test" in efforts to push for the best numbers. In my experience, this isn't the best way to educate kids. In your experience, it seems to be the way to go (and no offense you sound a little on the elitist side when it comes to this issue.)
Private schools must still submit to NAEP testing in 4th, 8th and 12th grade. Additionally, most private school students will experience the greatest standardized tests of all, the SAT or ACT. What they do not have to do (though many do participate in them) is administer state based standardized testing.
I am not in favor of standardized testing as the "be all end all" of education. In fact I think I said several posts back that I was big fan of "classical" education. To that point though, there is nothing wrong with standardized testing except for the fact that funding and accountability are tied to it. If a school does poorly on standardized testing, they invite greater scrutiny and risk losing funding. The testing can be used in a positive way though to measure achievement and progress.
In my children's schools they use a tool called MAP testing that is administered to the kids 3 times a year (beginning, middle and end of school). It gauges their individual mastery of material and is used to help determine areas they need improvement and facilitate the grouping of students for small class instruction. For example, my son does not learn math, science, reading, etc. the way we did sitting in a class of 30 desks arranged in a square facing a blackboard. His subjects are covered in small group instruction through rotating stations where groups of 3-5 kids of similar level are learning the material in a way that is appropriate for them.
Schools and teachers loathe the idea of "teaching to the test", but if you can come up with a better method of gauging progress then I'm all ears. At the end of the day "success" is measured in "future achievement" and by all measures, NJ produces very high achievers.
As for me being elitist, far from it. In fact, I rather loathe the negative aspects of academia that true "elitists" seem to love. I have said where I went to school and what my degree is in on this forum only because people have directly asked me. If you want my honest opinion, if my degree wasn't "free" I NEVER would have went to the school I did because it was an absolute waste of money (thank you generous almuni donors). The one advantage it does confer upon me is name recognition so that actual academic elitist snobs have to acceptingly nod when I tell them where I went to college.
On the otherhand, I am perplexed by your seeming hatred for a system you feel "wronged" you in so many ways. Obviously personal experience is the greatest denominator in shaping our opinions, but you must realize that your experience was not "typical" and amounts to nothing more then anecdote in the general discussion of this topic. I respect your opinion that has been shaped by your experience, but I see no evidence on the whole to support your statements as being nothing but your opinion.
if they arent a good test taker, then they havent learned the content required to pass the test. im not really sure how else you can make sure someone has learned without testing them. but im all for improving the quality of the tests. but its gotta be tests.
i dont think we need better teachers. maybe we need better instructions on how exactly a teacher should teach. im fine with them just standing in front of a class and lecturing. i dont really know whats going on in every class to judge and i dont want to. ultimately, its the students obligation to do well. thats why i like standardized tests as well, you arent subject to the whim of a teacher.
Good god, thank the high heavens you arent a special Ed teacher. If you were i would think youd have kids condemned
If you are talking about real private schools then the difference is tremendous. Even, I'm afraid, when compared to top notch public schools.
The only difference is connections and networking. If you have enough money (or are lucky/smart/gifted at sports enough to get a scholarship) to go to Lawrenceville, Princeton Day School, Hun, Peddie, Blair, etc...you simply get access that other people don't. Those schools are pipelines to the Ivy League and other prestigious liberal arts colleges because of the network that has been built over time since many of them are nearly as old as the United States itself. Trust me, I played hockey with a lot of guys from those schools and some of them were as dumb as a box of rocks or were more concerned with partying than school, but their old man went there, so did their grandfather, etc...
The only difference is connections and networking. If you have enough money (or are lucky/smart/gifted at sports enough to get a scholarship) to go to Lawrenceville, Princeton Day School, Hun, Peddie, Blair, etc...you simply get access that other people don't. Those schools are pipelines to the Ivy League and other prestigious liberal arts colleges because of the network that has been built over time since many of them are nearly as old as the United States itself. Trust me, I played hockey with a lot of guys from those schools and some of them were as dumb as a box of rocks or were more concerned with partying than school, but their old man went there, so did their grandfather, etc...
On this we shall have to disagree. Although I would suggest that unless you've had a kid in both situations you are not best positioned to determine the differences.
Good god, thank the high heavens you arent a special Ed teacher. If you were i would think youd have kids condemned
i dont think thats totally fair. i would expect that if i was any kind of teacher i would probably do very well. im just thinking from the perspective of the millions of students that in reality a uniform procedure is going to work if we perfect the procedure rather than hope for "good teachers" and complain about "bad teachers."
I get that all the time. FWIW, I look older then I am as well. All the men in my family go gray early, but at least we get to keep the hair we have, lol.
i expect leftists to be shocked when they agree with me, not moderates.
I think you will feel differently once your kids are actually in school. Time will tell.
well, mine are in school and there's nothing wrong with what badfish said. my husband and i actually lived that life, and unbelievably we are well adjusted successful adults with a solid portfolio. shocking I know
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.
