<p>" I doubt they would be much happier if he said he was going to teach in a private high school "
-We do not know that. but it was not the point. The point was debate about compensation which is artificially created.
In regard to centralized government run systems in other countries, it is not comparable to USA. USA wants to have it both ways, it does not work. In other (centralized) systems, gov. does not give any rights to people, including rights to parents compalining about program being too challenging. They simply do not listen ( I am not saying that it is good, I am stayting the fact). Many of these types of programs are so way more challenging (for everybody , there is no Honors/AP/Regular, whatever), they are simply not comparable to k-12, like apples and oranges. And kids are doing much better because they are not bored. My grandkids complain about math being boring all the time. And then, I was shown the problems for 7th grade (over summer problems). Solutions to some of them is suggesting …guessing. I was shocked, but trying to argue with a 12 year old is futile. I showed her she did not need to guess, there is a formula, I solved it for her, but it does not matter when directions are saying otherwise. You see, some methods (in some best public schools in NYC) are even preventing family to help a student. Just dummy them down at 12 and then complain that they are not prepared…this is a proper way, I suppose, college can collect more money this way.</p>
<p>xiggi, you are clearly right. I was wrong to suggest that none of the countries that scored well in the PISA studies had significant private education. (I know, of course, that all of the English-speaking countries have some, but I wasn’t sure how significant they were. I imagine Ireland has a lot of church-run schools, so “none” was hyperbole no matter what.)</p>
<p>On the other hand, I am confused by your hints about regional differences in Belgium. Since the Dutch/French divide is generally one of culture and religion as well as language, and since French largely means Catholic, and since the French underperform the Dutch, doesn’t that mean that the Catholic schools – which have to be largely French, and have to represent a huge portion of the education of Francophone children given the size of the system – are underperforming the government-established schools?</p>
<p>JHS, because of prior research, I knew about the situation of Belgium. Albeit different, there is a similar distribution in the Netherlands. </p>
<p>As far as the differences between the linguistic regions, there are few clear black on white elements. And that is what makes comparing the systems fascinating. As I pointed to earlier, the performance of the catholic system supports the notion that it delivers better results. The private system is also much more developed in Flanders and Brussels than it is in Wallonia, reflecting the more conservative nature of the North. Simply stated, the impact of catholic education is smaller in the South, where the political leanings are clearly liberal and socialistic. There is much greater support and demand for the public system of education in the South, at times as a matter of principle. </p>
<p>However, it would be a mistake to think there is a clear answer. There are other issues to consider, namely the unequal SES distribution, unequal funding among regions, and a pretty substantial impact of immigration patterns. As an example since most immigrants came from countries with a french system of education, the immigrants opted for the path of least resistance. They also happened to be poorer and harder to educate. </p>
<p>It is never simple!</p>
<p>I am not sure whether I watched this on PBS or 20/20, but in Belgium the best schools operate on a first come first serve basis. No high stake tests to get into the best schools. Some parents have to queue for two days to get their kids into the best schools. </p>
<p>They interviewed a couple (the man was Dutch and the wife was French) who had to share the queuing duties to get their kids into the best school in Brussels (I think it was a bilingual school). I love their system; the money follow s wherever the kids choose to go, so there is real competition among the schools to be good, otherwise, the schools won’t get anyone to queue for a place in their schools.</p>
<p>The Dutch side is far richer than the French side, and the Dutch side is basically supporting the French side. This is the reason why they have not been able to form a government in almost two years after the last election. The Dutch side wants to break away and form a separate country. The PISA scores for the Dutch is far better than the French side.</p>
<p>Tega, that has indeed happened in Brussels, Belgium, but is not universal. The situation has been difficult in Brussels as few spots open up in specific grades at sought-after schools. Some enterprising college students responded with “stay in line” services to alleviate the suffering. I am not certain as this small crisis is still in effect as schools made changes, including replacing the “lines” with a lottery system. Of course, knowing Belgians, they probably formed a line to get the “good” lottery tickets. :)</p>
<p>PS In 2011, 98 percent of the students will attend a school of their choice, and 90 percent will attend their first choice.</p>
<p>Xiggi, they showed some other parents paying students to queue for them! I think it was very good money. I prefer this to the lottery system, with this, parents have control over the process, you show up first your kid gets to go there; it is simple. </p>
<p>I hate the lottery system. After witnessing a grandmother some time ago balling her eyes out when her granddaughter did not get picked for a highly sought after school, I realized this system of picking students, although fair, is not optimal at all. This grandmother would have probably attended all PTA meetings, contributed more to the school in a lot of ways. I felt so sad for her that she felt all the other options available to her granddaughter were just not good.</p>
<p>I have consistently made the argument that, it is not about money. In NJ there is an equalization program where poor neighborhoods even get more money than the rich neighborhoods, but the schools are still bad in these poor neighborhoods. I believe every parent should be allowed to send his or her kids to any school she chooses. For this to happen we should decouple education funding from local property taxes.</p>
<p>I thought any parent is indeed allowed to send his or her kid to any school they want?</p>
<p>Well, in the US, anyone could put school choice in practice. They can vote with their feet by moving to the right district or pay private school tuitions. Or discover the joy and pitfalls of homeschooling.</p>
<p>Problem is that the “anyone could” hardly translates to “everyone can.” The students who could benefit the most from active school choice usually cannot move or afford a private school.</p>
<p>As an immigrant who came to this country with a royal $750 in my pocket, it always amuses me when Americans claim poverty and inability to move.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well said. I felt it needed repeating.</p>
<p>I know it’s a taboo subject, but can parents do something here?</p>
<p>IP, I’m wondering what else you came here with? Did you know people here who helped you get started? Were you already educated? Did you have a job or school waiting for you? My dad scrubbed potatoes on a ship in order to get here, but he was coming for graduate school, wanted by this country, etc. Poverty is not just a lack of money.</p>
<p>IP, if most parents were not money constrained, then yes, any parent can send his or her kid to any school of their choice. As Xiggi wrote, for a lot of people who can’t afford to move to a better school district or afford non-religious private school or not Catholic (most Catholic schools even give preference to the students in their Parish), they are “stuck” with the schools they are zoned for. </p>
<p>This is a terrible system, a lot of very motivated students in these poor (not money only) school districts could definitely benefit from being in an academically challenging environment. These students are “stuck” in schools where mediocrity is the norm and the teachers teach to the lowest denominator.</p>
<p>These neighborhoods in NJ (Irvington and Maplewood or Summit) are only streets apart but the school systems are world apart, I can’t see why a motivated student from Irvington couldn’t be accommodated in the Summit schools.</p>
<p>Knew no one, didn’t have a job waiting for me. Like your dad I came here to do my PhD. My scholarship was significantly below poverty levels. Thrived on that for years.</p>
<p>How do the Asian poor do it?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lucky you! A friend of mine from college came to the US from Africa with less than two hundred dollars in his pocket. He graduated with two majors in Economics and Chemistry; he had a minor in mathematics, philosophy and English literature and he even took classes in women studies! He was not the only person with this drive to learn; I realized that almost all the international students were very motivated. You know why? These students were the top students in their countries. </p>
<p>The US government usually gives visa to people who are academically on top or who are wealthy. I can convincingly say that the average person from your country won’t easily get a visa to come here. The average person in your country also can’t afford to send their kids to any school they want.</p>
<p>The comparison is not between you and those who can’t move; it is between the avarage person in your country who can’t afford to send his or her kid to any place he or she wants and the average person here in the US who can’t do the same.</p>
<p>Wrong. I know Indian families who have a tiny store or a restaurant or a gas station or something, nit educated at all, definitely not your typical grad student destined for wall street or silicon valley. They put the highest priority on their kids educations and somehow manage to get it done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IP, we all know that there are plenty of examples of industrious immigrants who sacrificed everything to give their children a better life through education. We DO know that Asians do value education and consider it the best tool to emerge from poverty or a lower social standing. But, as always, this is not a black on white story, but one with plenty of shades of grey. For every highly educated family of immigrants, there are others who do not come from the same background. </p>
<p>The children of an IIT educated Asian do not compare easily to the Asians who come from rural and agrarian communities. While not that easy to find in a wealthy suburb in Boston, the young persons depicted in the movie Gran Torino do exist. Just as they exist in the various slums in the country that house plenty of Hmongs or Laotians. Some DO emerge from their difficult lives, but many do … not. </p>
<p>In the same vein, there are students who emerge from those abjects projects that are part of our urban landscape. But again, many cannot because of circumstances that make breaking the cycles of poverty difficult. Poor people are often poor because of the compounding effects of centuries of poor habits and … lack of freedom and opportunities. </p>
<p>I realize that it is easy to dismiss such conditions as … excuses. We know that the smart and dynamic young people are creating their opportunities. The problem is that the challenges and handicaps are not exactly the same for everyone.</p>
<p>*
As an immigrant who came to this country with a royal $750 in my pocket, *</p>
<p>I am surprised that they let you in with so little- I would hope that immigrants have enough to find a place to live & support themselves while looking for a job, unless they are refugees.</p>
<p>However a new immigrant is going to find it easier to move than someone who has ties to their community.</p>
<p>A new immigrant just broke all the ties to his/her home country and moved thousands of miles away. Excuses abound.</p>