the-pi-guy said:
“Public schools were actually outperforming demographically similar private schools,” Lubienski said. “When we look at similar students in the different types of schools, in mathematics anyways, kids in public schools are, on average, performing at a level higher than students at charter or private schools.” So, if not a better education, what exactly does a child get from an expensive private education? University of Wisconsin-Madison professor Gloria Ladson-Billings suggested that it’s more about the lasting connections one can forge at a private institution. It looks like it says exactly what I thought it said.
|
Math only, as stated in the article. Its based on a book that made a big splash a few years ago. That books was largely debunked.
The biggest error is that it compares good public schools to private schools. Good public schools are not the problem. The problem is that there are a shitload of bad public schools. And people are forced to pay for them and forced to go to them.
The problem is not money, as some of the worst public schools spend far more than average, per pupil. So, more government money cannot fix the problem. We've been trying that for 25 years or more.
Anyway, if you want me to do a Google search and post some headlines that support my case, I can do so. But, frankly, I'm not here to argue. I've spent most of my adult life working to reduce poverty, reduce government's role in education, and otherwise improve the lives of the poorest among us. I will continue to do so. Your position on education - or, what I assume your position to be - is in support of keeping poor people trapped in a life of ignorance and poverty. Do a little research about public school funding, spending per pupil, and demographics. You'll see.
