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.
You need to re-think your personal definition of "scholarship". Think more along the lines of "applying for free money to go to a school that costs money and qualifying for it". Meaning a grant for people who fit the qualifications to which the grant money is set aside for. Not necessarily for the smartest/most athletic kid in the class.
What's your point? I was responding to a poster who was implying that Catholic Schools performed better because they have higher income students and scholarships, when given out, were given out to the top performers. I was pointing out what you apparently are saying. The Catholic Schools clearly give scholarships not just to the brightest but to those in need. Its part of their charity thing. Their high results don't rely on "cherry picked" students.
Well ... if you want to send your kids to a bigot factory ...................
Oh here look! Bigot alert! Another one of those....
If you don't agree with liberalism you're a bigot.
If you want to reduce immigration you're a bigot.
If you want foreigners to learn English you're a bigot.
If you don't believe in AGW you're a bigot.
If you disagree with Dear Leader you're a bigot.
If you drive an SUV you're a bigot.
If you're a hetero white Christian male you're a bigot.
If you support homeschooling you're a bigot.
If you support school vouchers you're a bigot.
If you don't support big government programs you're a bigot.
If you make more than [insert some arbitrary income figure here] you're a bigot.
If you don't worship Europe you're a bigot.
If you want to stop illegal immigration you're a bigot.
If you don't believe in gay marriage you're a bigot.
If you think gays choose to be gay you're a bigot.
My my, how very black and white the world must look to a liberal doesn't it? I think liberals have serious self-esteem problems. Projecting their bigotry and unconscious biases and hate on conservatives.
Oh here look! Bigot alert! Another one of those....
If you don't agree with liberalism you're a bigot.
If you want to reduce immigration you're a bigot.
If you want foreigners to learn English you're a bigot.
If you don't believe in AGW you're a bigot.
If you disagree with Dear Leader you're a bigot.
If you drive an SUV you're a bigot.
If you're a hetero white Christian male you're a bigot.
If you support homeschooling you're a bigot.
If you support school vouchers you're a bigot.
If you don't support big government programs you're a bigot.
If you make more than [insert some arbitrary income figure here] you're a bigot.
If you don't worship Europe you're a bigot.
If you want to stop illegal immigration you're a bigot.
If you don't believe in gay marriage you're a bigot.
If you think gays choose to be gay you're a bigot.
My my, how very black and white the world must look to a liberal doesn't it? I think liberals have serious self-esteem problems. Projecting their bigotry and unconscious biases and hate on conservatives.
What's your point? I was responding to a poster who was implying that Catholic Schools performed better because they have higher income students and scholarships, when given out, were given out to the top performers. I was pointing out what you apparently are saying. The Catholic Schools clearly give scholarships not just to the brightest but to those in need. Its part of their charity thing. Their high results don't rely on "cherry picked" students.
Well you need to refer to SAT scores comparing group outcomes, whites, to blacks. Race is the dominant determinate. Contrary to your hopes, instruction does little in lessening the gap. I know that may come as a shock to you but it's the truth. Also, you know those parents that pushed their kids? ...They have higher IQ's on average than parents that don't push their kids.
So it's NOT good schools, produce higher IQ students, who perform well on the SAT.
It's high IQ parents (who have higher incomes) passing their genes on to their kids who use that ability to score well on tests.
Now, it is true they do choose to send their kids better schools because it does make a small difference and they can afford private schools and high income school districts.
This is quite possibly the best example of liberal racism that I've ever seen! A good home life with parental involvement, respect for authority, a conducive learning environment, a desire to excel in school mean nothing... IT'S ALL ABOUT THE GENES.
Its an attitude thing. Not of the teachers, but of the parents. Kids are held accountable for their actions at school and home. Kids are made to do the work. I knew some real idiots in catholic school, but they came in with the work done.
So... A) the thesis of your post is that you think that selective schools are completely unselective and don't even kick out the worst students, and B) you are unaware of the giant differences in scores between races, or between admission rates, or what? In this country, in any racially mixed school district, race is easily the biggest factor in results.
Attributed to not having to contend with Unions, higher academic and moral expectations and parents' free choice of school. What do you think is the key? What can the public schools learn?
Because there is a waiting list to get into catholic schools so they don't have to tolerate your kid (parents have a problem with how they teach their kid or junior misbehaves, take junior and leave, someone else will be in the kid's place tomorrow) and because parents pay for it, indicating they care about their kid's education enough to fork over the bucks (not that public school parents don't care but ALL of catholic school kids parents care enough to pay), I'm not surprised that catholic schools outperform public schools. For this one, I really don't think teachers have anything to do with it.
Catholic and private schools for that matter do not have to take anybody.
And they can kick kids out.
And they can fail kids and have them repeat the grade.
Public schools cannot refuse or kick out.
And way too many are just passed through the system via social promotions.."they have the potential" even with failing grades.
Hard to make an apples to apples comparison when non public schools can pick and choose who they allow in while public schools cannot.
Behavior, emotional and special ed are part and parcel of a public school classroom and kids, regardless of their learning ability, are tested at their age level.
The question shouldn't be what makes private schools better but what is dragging down public schools.
Catholic and private schools for that matter do not have to take anybody.
And they can kick kids out.
And they can fail kids and have them repeat the grade.
Public schools cannot refuse or kick out.
And way too many are just passed through the system via social promotions.."they have the potential" even with failing grades.
Hard to make an apples to apples comparison when non public schools can pick and choose who they allow in while public schools cannot.
Behavior, emotional and special ed are part and parcel of a public school classroom and kids, regardless of their learning ability, are tested at their age level.
The question shouldn't be what makes private schools better but what is dragging down public schools.
I agree that the ability of private schools to kick out kids may be partly driving this phenomenon. I attended Catholic school for 13 years and received a great education, but kids were asked to leave my grade school for persistent behavior/discipline problems and to leave my high school for both behavioral and academic under-performance issues. My incoming high school class has 625 students - by the time we graduated, we were down to 475. To the best of my knowledge, public schools don't have this option.
That study covered a narrow set of schools in a specific location, but it does support your contention. The Fox News piece in your OP was presented as a very wide-ranging "report." I noticed they presented absolutely nothing to back up their claims. Fox is notorious for trying to present biased opinion as "news."
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.
