A Friend of mine who is an educator....

[Frances Bavier]

Data does exist to show that, on average, private schoo; students fare better on college entrance tests than their public school counterparts.

If you are going to find some pertinent data to support your claims about the higher level of education to be had at a private school, let's just weed out the bottom half of the scores from the kids in public schools. That is effectively what the privates do. You wish to compare the scores of the population of a pre-selected student body versus the scores of a student body that is forced to accept and retain a percentage of kids that have absolutely no motivation, no home life, and, in many cases, no desire. If you wish to make claims of a superior education that can be had at a private school, then I'm sure you'll want to at least get the metrics by which we measure that success correct. Then again, you probably don't.

 

Of all of the private schools the only one that truly has a claim to being on a completely different level in this state is Kentucky Country Day. They have a track record that is out of touch for ALL other schools in this state. Of the public schools, Manual is leading the way.

 

Thanks,

Frances

[Dino]

Sure, why not. While you are at your simple math calculation, try to advance yourself with a little sub data analysis. Make sure to include the percent of a public school population that are special needs and free/reduced lunch vs. private schools. Or are you of the opinion that entire student populations do not need to be measured?

 

When one actually removes those students who fall under those particular sub groups and those scores removed from the testing pool, you will actually find better education results in the public school vs. the private. As noted in a Christian Science Monitor article (A religious publication saying public schools are doing better than private?!), measured like demographic groups of students, public schools are providing better results.

 

And, I am well aware of the testing publication parameters of public education. What I find most interesting is the fear of the private schools to measure themselves publically to similar or same tests.

I don't think that I will waste my time, Silver Shadow. For some reason, I don't think any amount of data will sway your opinion and I don't plan on doing months worth of multi-variate statistical analysis for your amusement.

 

However, if you believe that doing such an analysis will make your case, then please knock yourself out. I would be happy to provide you with an objective peer review of your work. :lol:

 

Please provide a link to the CSM article. That sounds like interesting reading.

 

Thanks.

[SilverShadow]

Both you and Tigershark continue to make a claim of better educational results with private schools vs. public schools. Excluding myself, several have asked for support of such statements. Yet, public school supporters have provided links and facts. Now, you wish to remove from the measurement part of the debate. That is all OK. You are not the first to wish to stop from the challenge when the debate goes from the assumption to the factual.

[Dino]

If you are going to find some pertinent data to support your claims about the higher level of education to be had at a private school, let's just weed out the bottom half of the scores from the kids in public schools. That is effectively what the privates do. You wish to compare the scores of the population of a pre-selected student body versus the scores of a student body that is forced to accept and retain a percentage of kids that have absolutely no motivation, no home life, and, in many cases, no desire. If you wish to make claims of a superior education that can be had at a private school, then I'm sure you'll want to at least get the metrics by which we measure that success correct. Then again, you probably don't.

 

Of all of the private schools the only one that truly has a claim to being on a completely different level in this state is Kentucky Country Day. They have a track record that is out of touch for ALL other schools in this state. Of the public schools, Manual is leading the way.

 

Thanks,

Frances

Frances,

 

Please don't presume that I want to present a biased picture of education in this country and I will not attribute any insincere motives to you.

 

There is a reason that groups such as the NEA have fought tooth and nail against reform proposals like school vouchers. Even proposals by conservatives to pick participants for pilot programs from the subgroups that you described have met with fierce resistance. The pilot programs that have been implemented have had very promising results.

 

There is no denying that private schools have the advantage of teaching students who want to learn, or teaching students whose parents want them to learn. It is also a fact that private schools have the luxury of giving unruly students the boot in order to provide an environment more conducive to learning for the students who are there for an education. While public school "proponents" are quick to point these factors out, private schools also (again, on average) with less much less funding. So, if you want to factor all of the advantages that private schools have, you also must factor in the funding disadvantage with which most of them have to deal.

 

That being said, it appears that the private school critics participating in this thread already know that private schools, on average, get better results with fewer resources. I say it is obvious, because that was the only claim that I made and when challenged for data to support my position, nit-picking of the data commenced before it was even posted.

 

Does anybody here disagree with the premise that the national average on college entrance scores for graduates of private schools is higher than the scores for graduates of public schools? If not, then why challenge my position at all? Feel free to point out the reasons that private schools do more with less, but at least acknowledge that their test scores are, in fact, higher just as I stated.

 

I have been a staunch supporter of public schools throughout my adult life. However, I don't think that attacking private schools for filling a void left by public schools is in any way supporting public schools. This is not a zero-sum game. Strong public schools can co-exist peacefully with outstanding private schools. Parents who send their children to private schools and their tax dollars to Frankfort and to local taxing districts should not be villified, nor should they be penalized, for their decisions.

 

That is exactly what the public schools attempt to separate private and public schools for athletic competitions would do. It is a transparent attempt by public school administrators to punish tax-paying Kentucky citizens for sending their children to private schools.

[Dino]

Both you and Tigershark continue to make a claim of better educational results with private schools vs. public schools. Excluding myself, several have asked for support of such statements. Yet, public school supporters have provided links and facts. Now, you wish to remove from the measurement part of the debate. That is all OK. You are not the first to wish to stop from the challenge when the debate goes from the assumption to the factual.

SilverShadow, I have read enough of your posts on related subjects to know how your debates go. If I take time to post ACT scores on a state by state basis, for private vs. public schools, etc., you will respond by throwing out some acronyms like "IDEA" and then dismiss whatever stats that I present as a comparison of apples and oranges. I have read those debates before I signed up. Don't expect me to waste my time like those other guys did.

 

You have already attempted to dictate the factors that I should take into account in gathering data. However, I am sure that you already know that I will not find statistics that match your criteria because I would be posting published study results, not delving into raw data and preparing a custom report for you.

 

If you want to make your case, why don't you present the data this time? A good start would be a link to the CSM article that you cited. I am not asking you to rewrite the article to meet my specifications, only to post a link to a finished product. :lol:

[Frances Bavier]

Please don't presume that I want to present a biased picture of education in this country ...

I'm not presuming any such thing. I am responding to your posts (as others on this thread have done) and am presenting you with a legitimate question. You have not bothered to back up your earlier statements with data, and now you are attempting to evade my request for data that isn't knowingly skewed. Rather hard to make a point when rhetoric isn't held in high esteem, isn't it?

 

 

Does anybody here disagree with the premise that the national average on college entrance scores for graduates of private schools is higher than the scores for graduates of public schools? If not, then why challenge my position at all? Feel free to point out the reasons that private schools do more with less, but at least acknowledge that their test scores are, in fact, higher just as I stated.

I can't speak for the others that are involved in this debate, but for myself, I would certainly hope that ON AVERAGE the college entrance scores for graduates of private schools is higher than the scores for graduates of public schools. If you agree with the fact that the AVERAGE public school scores are skewed because of the inclusion of the "at risk" kids, it is painfully obvious that you are comparing data sets that have very little in common. I would think that someone as intelligent as you obviously are would be able to understand why.

 

 

That is exactly what the public schools attempt to separate private and public schools for athletic competitions would do. It is a transparent attempt by public school administrators to punish tax-paying Kentucky citizens for sending their children to private schools.

I would submit that the public schools are tired of hearing how little effort they put into academics, and how absolutely lethargic their student athletes are. What is transparent in this debate is that some participants (but not all) on one side of the aisle are using red herrings to divert the discussion from the intent of the original post of this thread. Couple that with an unrelenting fervor to rely on rhetoric rather than pertinent factual evidence, and I'd say that somebody is trying to avoid the salient points of this debate.

 

Thanks,

Frances

[Frances Bavier]

SilverShadow, I have read enough of your posts on related subjects to know how your debates go. If I take time to post ACT scores on a state by state basis, for private vs. public schools, etc., you will respond by throwing out some acronyms like "IDEA" and then dismiss whatever stats that I present as a comparison of apples and oranges. I have read those debates before I signed up. Don't expect me to waste my time like those other guys did.

 

In logic, this is known as "poisoning the well". You are attempting to discredit SilverShadow, and evading his points. While doing so, you are attempting to pre-condition a reader to believe that SilverShadow already has his response in hand, and that his response will not fairly judge your reply.

 

At least do us the courtesy of keeping the debate honest.

 

Frances

[Dino]

Rather hard to make a point when rhetoric isn't held in high esteem, isn't it?

I made the offer to post scores supporting my positon. Conditions were set on the criteria of the data that I would be posting. Not having access to the raw data, and not having the time to tailor it to meet the criteria that you and SilverShadow laid out, I submit that the empty rhetoric is not mine. If you want to support your position, I suggest you post data that fits your criteria. Fair enough?

 

In fact, if you and SilverShadow want to fund a detailed study customized to your exact specification, I would be glad to comply. Does $60/hr. sound reasonable? As a bonus, compiling the raw data into a report would keep me too busy to post on BGP for awhile. :lol:

[Dino]

In logic, this is known as "poisoning the well". You are attempting to discredit SilverShadow, and evading his points. While doing so, you are attempting to pre-condition a reader to believe that SilverShadow already has his response in hand, and that his response will not fairly judge your reply.

 

At least do us the courtesy of keeping the debate honest.

 

Frances

Silver Shadow, by listing the criteria that should be taken into account in the data that I would be posting to support my position effectively declined my offer. He (and you) set the pre-conditions - not me. I deeply resent the implication that I am being dishonest, and request that you refrain from making additional personal attacks.

 

Thanks.

 

Dino

[Frances Bavier]

Nothing personal about it - you are being asked to back up your claims with some evidence (other than anecdotal claims). You have none, and as a result, you are doing everything in your power to leave the onus of proof on us. Thank you very much, but I'll decline your offer of proving your claims for you.

 

Please do not attempt to misrepresent my position. I'm fully aware of what I am asking of you. If you do not like the pressure of being asked to cite your sources, fine. Admit such, and we can move on. If you have something to base your claims on, let's see it. Either way, try not to play the role of the "offended party of the first part". It is quite unbecoming.

 

Thanks,

Frances

[Dino]

Nothing personal about it - you are being asked to back up your claims with some evidence (other than anecdotal claims). You have none, and as a result, you are doing everything in your power to leave the onus of proof on us. Thank you very much, but I'll decline your offer of proving your claims for you.

 

Please do not attempt to misrepresent my position. I'm fully aware of what I am asking of you. If you do not like the pressure of being asked to cite your sources, fine. Admit such, and we can move on. If you have something to base your claims on, let's see it. Either way, try not to play the role of the "offended party of the first part". It is quite unbecoming.

 

Thanks,

Frances

Enjoy. Findings from the Condition of Education 2002: Private Schools: A Brief Portrait

 

For your convenience, I am also providing a link to the NEA website, where you will find some liberally massaged data that "proves" how much better public schools do educating children than their private school counterparts. I am skeptical about statistics cited and studies funded by special interest groups attempting to justify their own existence, but not everybody is a skeptic.

[Frances Bavier]

Enjoy. Findings from the Condition of Education 2002: Private Schools: A Brief Portrait

 

For your convenience, I am also providing a link to the NEA website, where you will find some liberally massaged data that "proves" how much better public schools do educating children than their private school counterparts. I am skeptical about statistics cited and studies funded by special interest groups attempting to justify their own existence, but not everybody is a skeptic.

 

There you go! Turns out that it wasn't all that hard to Google up a site after all, was it?

 

Two items of note (for my interests):

 

First, as I would have suspected, the Roman Catholics have the single highest percentage of private schools at 28%. The thing I find interesting is that the second highest percentage of private schools have no sectarian bent at just under 23%. While this is not germane to our discussion, I did find it interesting.

 

Second, the single statistic that I find most telling was that 56% of all students that attend private schools go on to attend a four year college. That is a fine number - I wonder how it compares to public schools (again, keeping in mind that the publics are forced to accept a group of kids that the privates would chuck out the door on the first day of school). If you consider that schools like Kentucky Country Day send upwards of 99% of their kids on to four year colleges (and I would throw in the rates of schools like Trinity and St. X), then it doesn't take a mental giant to understand that some of the private schools aren't nearly as good as the 56% average. Basically, what this evidences is something that we already know (but some are not willing to admit) - that private schools, just like public schools - range from excellent (KCD, Manual) to very good (Trinity/St.X, Oldham/Ashland) to pretty dismal. The blanket statement that "private schools offer a better education that public schools" is ludicrous, as all generalizations are. The fact that a politician from Louisville makes such an ill-informed statement shouldn't surprise anyone. The fact that intelligent people would try to defend such asinine comments is questionable, at best.

 

I do appreciate your insinuation that any data provided by the NEA is worthless, due to being "liberally massaged". We are both smart enough to realize that statistics can be manipulated to provide evidence of almost anything (and it is, everyday). That said, dismissing a data set before even digesting or discussing it is a blatant attempt to poison the well. This appears to be a logical fallacy that you specialize in. If you are not willing to examine the data, simply because you have a preconceived notion that it has no value due to being accumulated by a group with which you disagree, why bother to even cite the data? Wouldn't it be more intellectually honest to just say "I don't care what their data indicates - they are all liars anyway"?

 

Thanks,

Frances

[Trinity alum]

Yes they are posting links, both of which destroyed their own argument. I will provide some useful links tomorrow but again the only way to compare the two is by examining the number of National Merit finalist, the percentage of graduates accepted to and enrolling in college, and the number of those students who receive financial assistance due to academic performance. I would also like to examine the average SAT and ACT scores between the two. I will get my hands on that tomorrow.

Sorry tigershark, I will have to disagree with you. Most of the measures you cite are self selection measures. Take the example of National Merit finalists. If a kid is in the 99th percentile when they enter high school, there is a pretty good chance that a little over half way through high school when they take the National Merit exam they will still be in the 99th percentile, regardless of where they go to high school. The percentage of National Merit finalists for Kentucky is the same as for other states since the selection score is, I believe, determined on a state by state basis to include a common percentage of the high school population. If you self select a group of academic high achievers into a group it is not surprising when the group contains academic high achievers. I am a strong backer of Catholic education but running down the public schools is not on my list of reasons to support my school

[Dino]

There you go! Turns out that it wasn't all that hard to Google up a site after all, was it?

 

Two items of note (for my interests):

 

First, as I would have suspected, the Roman Catholics have the single highest percentage of private schools at 28%. The thing I find interesting is that the second highest percentage of private schools have no sectarian bent at just under 23%. While this is not germane to our discussion, I did find it interesting.

 

Second, the single statistic that I find most telling was that 56% of all students that attend private schools go on to attend a four year college. That is a fine number - I wonder how it compares to public schools (again, keeping in mind that the publics are forced to accept a group of kids that the privates would chuck out the door on the first day of school). If you consider that schools like Kentucky Country Day send upwards of 99% of their kids on to four year colleges (and I would throw in the rates of schools like Trinity and St. X), then it doesn't take a mental giant to understand that some of the private schools aren't nearly as good as the 56% average. Basically, what this evidences is something that we already know (but some are not willing to admit) - that private schools, just like public schools - range from excellent (KCD, Manual) to very good (Trinity/St.X, Oldham/Ashland) to pretty dismal. The blanket statement that "private schools offer a better education that public schools" is ludicrous, as all generalizations are. The fact that a politician from Louisville makes such an ill-informed statement shouldn't surprise anyone. The fact that intelligent people would try to defend such asinine comments is questionable, at best.

 

I do appreciate your insinuation that any data provided by the NEA is worthless, due to being "liberally massaged". We are both smart enough to realize that statistics can be manipulated to provide evidence of almost anything (and it is, everyday). That said, dismissing a data set before even digesting or discussing it is a blatant attempt to poison the well. This appears to be a logical fallacy that you specialize in. If you are not willing to examine the data, simply because you have a preconceived notion that it has no value due to being accumulated by a group with which you disagree, why bother to even cite the data? Wouldn't it be more intellectually honest to just say "I don't care what their data indicates - they are all liars anyway"?

 

Thanks,

Frances

There you go again, casting aspersions on my integrity, Frances. I did not make the comment about the studies referenced on the NEA site without reading a few of them. I simply chose not to critique the way that the statistics were manipulated point by point. Your assumption that I did not take time to look at the studies cited by the NEA before commenting on them is sad. Can you not set aside your prejudice against conservatives long enough to engage in a civil debate? At least make the effort. You can only accuse me of "poisoning the well" while calling me a liar so many times before you start looking silly. You seem to be intelligent enough to debate on a little higher level than that.

 

Thanks.

 

Dino

[rockmom]

That's about as insulting as I've ever heard. You can tell your friend there are plenty of public schools who haven't dumbed down curriculum and there are LOTS of teachers and coaches who do more than draw a freaking paycheck. And that kind of attitude is exactly why some of the public schools have problems with uppity snotty people who think they are too good to attend a public school. My public school has over 50 kids getting college credits this year on our campus with a partnership with a local university, has instilled a new freshman academy with teacher's working overtime, had 3 national merit scholars last year, and on and on.........don't lump all "public" schools in the same boat just because you are upset about some stupid athletic vote. Athletics schould not drive high schools. Get over it, the BOC won't let it happen anyway. You educator friend obviously isn't very educated.

 

Just a couple of comments:

 

 

 

1st bolded statement: I guess this comment isn't a blanket statement about those who choose to attend private schools? I think you would find that most private school children and parents are not at all uppity and snotty. I think you'd find a great deal of them working extra jobs, and driving older cars, and doing with a few less "luxuries" to send their kids to their respective schools. I think you'd find some of the friendliest, most hospitable, respectful people you'd ever want to meet.

 

 

2nd bolded statement: I agree 100%. And I think that the public schools are placing too much emphasis on the split BECAUSE of athletics, when there are many schools underperforming academically. As I stated before, in another thread, it would be gratifying to see this kind of uproar related to academics.