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.
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?
Let me tell you about catholic school teachers, they get paid almost nothing and their kids don't get a break on tuition.
Emphasis on education and not catering to the lowest common denominator would be a good start.
When I went to school, both parochial and public schools were equal.
We had A, B, C divisions; they had it in the public schools, too.
I taught in the public school system. Parents whined about their poor babies having to study and compete. They demanded dumbing down of curriculum to meet the lowest common denominator, not pushing all students to excel. Excellence in sports is not equal to excellence in education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maja
Doubt that. Catholic schools often offer scholarships. Recent thread on here about a family of 12 kids that all attended Catholic Schools without paying a penny out of pocket.
Often. Hardly. Some schools may, but someone's always paying the bill. Either the cost is being borne by other tuition paying families or someone is footing the bill. You can't generalize about all catholic schools. Each diocese provides different services and has different quality schools.
It's silly to think that you can use a cookie cutter to describe the schools.
Let me tell you about catholic school teachers, they get paid almost nothing and their kids don't get a break on tuition.
Emphasis on education and not catering to the lowest common denominator would be a good start.
When I went to school, both parochial and public schools were equal.
We had A, B, C divisions; they had it in the public schools, too.
I taught in the public school system. Parents whined about their poor babies having to study and compete. They demanded dumbing down of curriculum to meet the lowest common denominator, not pushing all students to excel. Excellence in sports is not equal to excellence in education.
Often. Hardly. Some schools may, but someone's always paying the bill. Either the cost is being borne by other tuition paying families or someone is footing the bill. You can't generalize about all catholic schools. Each diocese provides different services and has different quality schools.
It's silly to think that you can use a cookie cutter to describe the schools.
I graduated from catholic school, and I would be the last person to blame unions and "moral expectations". In universities I competed with some fine students who were products of public school system. The world isn't as monochromatic as you appear to believe.
But you graduated from the Catholic Schools and you are on par with..."Einstein!"
I have no problem with private schools. I went to one myself, a very good - and non-denominational -one, and I contribute every year to their scholarship fund. As an atheist, I have a problem with religious schools and the indoctrination of young children.
I've been agnostic or atheist since I was about 8. Atheist now, and as I became more attuned to the world around me. I attended 12 years of catholic school.
Granted, I'm old.
Back in the day, when religious was just what people were without all of the absurd forcing the issue that we encounter today, we had religion class once a week in high school and they tried to force us to go to mass on Tuesday. They usually failed. Other than that, it was simply a private girls school.
The entire focus of my life, through high school, was education. It was just what we did then. Well, that and dating.
I'm completely against vouchers, as funding for the public system is provided to all and to reduce the funding and funnel it into private education undermines the public system.
If people want a private education, let them pay for it. They are provided a public education. If they want to be involved, join the school board.
Doubt that. Catholic schools often offer scholarships. Recent thread on here about a family of 12 kids that all attended Catholic Schools without paying a penny out of pocket.
One particular case does not mean that Catholic schools have an "Open Door" policy for every child that wants to attend but whose parents can't pay. Chances are there is simply not enough money for every at need kid that wants to attend. My bet is that if you took a income of survey of kids tha attend Catholic schools in a given city versus those in public schools the parents in Catholic schools would have higher incomes.
If public schools had the same ability to not accept or expel disruptive or bullying students, which I think is a good idea, what would society do with these people? As the public is unable to provide a reasonable answer to this question we keep these people in school for lack of anything better to do with them to the detriment of all of the students and to the society as the bullies still haven’t learned anything about behavior or anything else.
Where should they go? Straight to hell.
If a student is disruptive and not interested in education, they should not be in school. When and if they graduate, they will be a failure to society anyway, so kicking them out early would do little to society.
I really wonder why "society" spends so much time and money worrying about these disruptive losers. They simply erode the educational experience for those kids who have a chance. Get rid of the loser and let the students learn. Most of these losers are destined for prison anyway and trying to educate them is a waste of time and money.
If a student is disruptive and not interested in education, they should not be in school. When and if they graduate, they will be a failure to society anyway, so kicking them out early would do little to society.
I really wonder why "society" spends so much time and money worrying about these disruptive losers. They simply erode the educational experience for those kids who have a chance. Get rid of the loser and let the students learn. Most of these losers are destined for prison anyway and trying to educate them is a waste of time and money.
I wouldn't kick them out early..move them into vocational programs.
They may not have the ability for calculus but just might make an excellent car mechanic. Only they don't get a chance because "everyone is college material".
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?
This is no surprise. We home schooled our daughters. They always outperformed their public school couterparts by a huge margin. They always scored in the high 90's (percentile) on the standardized tests.
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.
