Quantcast
Public schools vs Private School vs Home school

Forums - Politics Discussion - Public schools vs Private School vs Home school

mrstickball said:
the2real4mafol said:
I know it's up the parents but i don't agree with home schooling. The kid may do better in education, but they will lack vital social skills.

Anyway, out of both public and private. I prefer public schools because then everyone is actually guaranteed a fairly decent education at very low cost (it's free to go but it's funded by taxes) and so can get a decent chance at life.
I'm sorry but for a basic need like education, you shouldn't have to use your life savings just to go to a decent private school. It's not right that for a few thousand pounds a year you get a far superior education, education shouldn't be dictated by money and the free market at all, it should be there just to better a person's life .


Wrong.

Go check some of the major cities around America. They're graduating below 50% of the kids, and require over $10,000 per student. Not every school provides a great education. Heck, in my county alone, we have huge variance. The school my wife graduated from requires about $9,000 per student in taxpayer funding, and graduates about 81% of kids. Comparatively, the one I should have gone to graduates 93% of kids, and requires only $5,500 per student in taxpayer funding.

Let me throw something crazy at you:

What if private education is cheaper than public education? Where I live, it is. You know how much our local private school costs? About $4,000 per student - lower than any nearby school. That is why many that like private education believe in vouchers - that kids have the right to education, regardless of the facility. If private schools are really better, why can't you take the money you've paid into the system and send your kids to a better place if it costs the same amount of money?


I would expect if the quality of incoming kids is lower (less well raised) as is often the case in major urban areas in America, the cost per student would be much higher to make their test scores the same as a higher quality incoming student.

About homeschooling: I'd heard of studies saying that, on average, homeschooled kids perform better than public schooled kids. The problem with this statistic is that it doesn't account for widely varying qualities among public school students. 

I dont doubt that most homeschooled kids have parents who care. This parents are often well off since theyll need the time to teach their child. So these homeschooled kids with devoted parents are being compared to public schools where many of the kids have extremely overworked/poor/not caring parents.

I wouldn't doubt that scores would be relatively the same for children from similar families regardless of where they go to school.



 

 

Around the Network
spurgeonryan said:
Seems whenever I hear A home schooler talk he is bragging about waking up whenever. This is not good Imo. Kids need to be used to waking up early. Not just whenever. Usually in the work force you need to be used to a schedule.

 

Actually waking up whenever is the best for their future

Sleep is one of the most important needs of a child/teenager, they will be better able to learn if rested, less moody, concentrate better, feel happier

Teenagers in particular have a body clock shift of about 2 hrs, where they cant help but go to bed later and wake up later, if you cater for this, teens will be less moody and better able to cope with learning, in conventional schools teens are forced to get up even earlier to their detriment

As for the workforce hours, as adults they will adjust with ease because their body clock is now far more flexible (one advantage of growing up)

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/teens-health/CC00019



Ah, thanks for sharing, guys. It appears I didn't know much about homeschooling the way you described.



Rab said:
spurgeonryan said:
Seems whenever I hear A home schooler talk he is bragging about waking up whenever. This is not good Imo. Kids need to be used to waking up early. Not just whenever. Usually in the work force you need to be used to a schedule.

 

Actually waking up whenever is the best for their future

Sleep is one of the most important needs of a child/teenager, they will be better able to learn if rested, less moody, concentrate better, feel happier

Teenagers in particular have a body clock shift of about 2 hrs, where they cant help but go to bed later and wake up later, if you cater for this, teens will be less moody and better able to cope with learning, in conventional schools teens are forced to get up even earlier to their detriment

As for the workforce hours, as adults they will adjust with ease because their body clock is now far more flexible (one advantage of growing up)

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/teens-health/CC00019


Kids need more sleep than adults, that's a fact.  Kids go to school earlier than parents go to work only to accomodate their parents' schedule.  I'm a firm believer that some kids are permanently left behind due to just this fact.  By the time their biological clock is awake, they've already zombied through two classes.  

I hated school. I can honestly say, I ditched school at every level all the way through graduate schools, whenever I could...just so I could sleep.  In fact, I also worked hard just to never have to wake up early again for a job.  The world has a bias against nocternal people.  When I started my own company, I stocked the company fridge with beer and I never gave anyone a hardtime not showing up early.  World is too uptight and too intolerant of people who just think differently.

Back to gaming, the first thing something goes wrong, everyone points their fingers at gamers.  It's ok to read about David vs Goliath, et tu Brute?, but the minute it's FUN in a video game, it's teaching violence.  Schools teach you to accept everything it establishes as accepted bahavior and brainwashes entire generations of people against TV, Video Games.  And force feed classes after classes of useless knowledge, not to enhance a kid's life, but to help ensure the scientific community reigns supreme.



public schools are definitely better. public schools have a much more varied education lineup with the best teachers. A lot of teachers in private schools aren't even certified, or at least not certified in all the areas that they teach.



Around the Network
im_sneaky said:
mrstickball said:
the2real4mafol said:
I know it's up the parents but i don't agree with home schooling. The kid may do better in education, but they will lack vital social skills.

Anyway, out of both public and private. I prefer public schools because then everyone is actually guaranteed a fairly decent education at very low cost (it's free to go but it's funded by taxes) and so can get a decent chance at life.
I'm sorry but for a basic need like education, you shouldn't have to use your life savings just to go to a decent private school. It's not right that for a few thousand pounds a year you get a far superior education, education shouldn't be dictated by money and the free market at all, it should be there just to better a person's life .


Wrong.

Go check some of the major cities around America. They're graduating below 50% of the kids, and require over $10,000 per student. Not every school provides a great education. Heck, in my county alone, we have huge variance. The school my wife graduated from requires about $9,000 per student in taxpayer funding, and graduates about 81% of kids. Comparatively, the one I should have gone to graduates 93% of kids, and requires only $5,500 per student in taxpayer funding.

Let me throw something crazy at you:

What if private education is cheaper than public education? Where I live, it is. You know how much our local private school costs? About $4,000 per student - lower than any nearby school. That is why many that like private education believe in vouchers - that kids have the right to education, regardless of the facility. If private schools are really better, why can't you take the money you've paid into the system and send your kids to a better place if it costs the same amount of money?


I would expect if the quality of incoming kids is lower (less well raised) as is often the case in major urban areas in America, the cost per student would be much higher to make their test scores the same as a higher quality incoming student.

About homeschooling: I'd heard of studies saying that, on average, homeschooled kids perform better than public schooled kids. The problem with this statistic is that it doesn't account for widely varying qualities among public school students. 

I dont doubt that most homeschooled kids have parents who care. This parents are often well off since theyll need the time to teach their child. So these homeschooled kids with devoted parents are being compared to public schools where many of the kids have extremely overworked/poor/not caring parents.

I wouldn't doubt that scores would be relatively the same for children from similar families regardless of where they go to school.

You should look into statistics for Cornerstone Schools in Detroit. They use a lottery system to accept the same poverty-striken kids that the public schools do.

Despite taking the same kinds of kids from the same backgrounds, they graduate >90% of kids vs. 35%, and still manage to cost about $5,000 less per student. You're correct that most private schools can pick who they want, but they're not all that way. In the case of Cornerstone, its the same kids. The big difference is their teaching methodology and parental guidance. They force parents to care about their kids' education, which results in higher scores from the same kinds of kids.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

They're all good, or all bad, based on a wide variety of factors ...

I've known people who home-schooled for a variety of reasons who have been very successful, a couple people who've sent their children to private school and had great results, and many people who have done well in our local public and Catholic school systems.

If you have a good public school system and your children are "average" than it is a very good choice, but if your children are gifted or have a learning disability it will not be that good of an option. If you have the cash and a good private school your children may be better off in one of these schools, but many people lack the cash. Finally, when done well, homeschooled children often perform far better because they get far more attention from someone who is focused on making them perform well, but few parents are willing or able to make the kind of changes in their lives necessary to homeschool their children.



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


Nor did I ever say that that was the case. I just concluded that a kid with wealthy parents have greater chances of entering private schools of high quality, which I find unfair. A child with rich parents evidently has more options.


What the hell? Because you have the money to pay for something better, that's unfair? Look buddy, if I have ten bucks I can force the vendor to sell Halo 4 to me. I gotta be happy with Angry Birds, see? It would be unfair with the developers and unfair with those who could pay more if the case was otherwise. Suck it up and accept it as a fact of life. Even if you could have half the populace to agree with you and come up with the perfect nanny state and somehow avoid bankrupting the country, it would lead to stagnation for there wouldn't be a reason for people to stand out and no more reason for Halo 4 to be different from Angry Birds. Again, suck it up and accept it if you still think that's unfair. Life is, after all.

Phew.

OT - home schooling as long as there's still a way for the children to come into frequent contact with one another and develop social skills. 



 

 

 

 

 

Selective public schools



Click this button, you know you want to!  [Subscribe]

Watch me on YouTube!

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRadishBros

~~~~ Mario Kart 8 drove far past my expectations! Never again will I doubt the wheels of a Monster Franchise! :0 ~~~~

haxxiy said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


Nor did I ever say that that was the case. I just concluded that a kid with wealthy parents have greater chances of entering private schools of high quality, which I find unfair. A child with rich parents evidently has more options.


What the hell? Because you have the money to pay for something better, that's unfair? Look buddy, if I have ten bucks I can force the vendor to sell Halo 4 to me. I gotta be happy with Angry Birds, see? It would be unfair with the developers and unfair with those who could pay more if the case was otherwise. Suck it up and accept it as a fact of life. Even if you could have half the populace to agree with you and come up with the perfect nanny state and somehow avoid bankrupting the country, it would lead to stagnation for there wouldn't be a reason for people to stand out and no more reason for Halo 4 to be different from Angry Birds. Again, suck it up and accept it if you still think that's unfair. Life is, after all.


Well, congratulations. It looks like you successfully managed to miss my entire point.

Of course people with more money should have exclusive access to more expensive things in life; people who work more or have more prestigious jobs deserve extra cash. When it comes to kids though, it is completely unfair to limit their possibilities by their parents' wallets. Kids don't choose where to be born. In a perfect world everyone would have the same options and then fully deserve whatever education and, later on, job/paycheck they choose to work for.