<p>I go to a private school and I have a what appear to be fairly average courses. My school is always commenting on how its students are more prepared for college. My school offers only 4 AP courses. Now the public school around the block have twice as many courses and around 12 to 14 AP courses. So I am wondering how I am better prepared for college. Also some kids who do poorly at my school end up transfering out for various reasons and go to public schools end up going from like a 2.0 to a 3.0. I do fairly well and am attending the Lyman Briggs College at Michigan State next fall. But I am thinking I may have been better off attending the public school that offers more AP courses and I may have even had a higher GPA. </p>
<p>So Questions:</p>
<p>My parents haven't really justified why I went to a private school. Why would you send your kid to a private school?</p>
<p>Is it resonable to think I would be more prepared for college than someone at a public school taking the same courses?</p>
<p>Do private schools tend to go more in depth than publics on course material?</p>
<p>*Remember im talking about high school I have no experience with public schools so I am just curious</p>
<p>John - I don't know that anyone can address your questions as they pertain to you specifically. There are some private schools that are better than many public schools, and some public schools that are better than many private schools. Search the CC archives and you'll find many viewpoints regarding the advantages of the different HS types. Good luck at Michigan State.</p>
<p>There are good and bad private high schools and good and bad public high schools, so it's hard to say anything. I went to a good private high school and my kids go to a good public high school. What I have observed is that my kid's teachers are every bit as good (and as bad) as the ones I had. They have a much bigger course choice selection than I had or that my old school currently offers. (Though it is now MUCH stronger in math and science than it was in my day.) The biggest difference is in the amount of writing required and class sizes. My kids teachers don't require weekly papers of 3-5 pages in English, or as many research papers. With larger classes the papers get corrected more slowly, sometimes in the case of their less good teacher, much, much more slowly. Many high schools don't offer "AP" courses, but their courses aren't less difficult, they just cover different material.</p>
<p>This is a really hard question and the answer is not obvious. I spent a fair amount of time comparing expensive (20K+) private HS's to some first rate public HS's and this is what I found out. The available courses are fairly similar in both title and content. The biggest difference is class size. The class size in privates tended to be about 1/2 to 2/3 of the publics. The biggest impact of this is in writing. Courses with a significant writing component tended to have proportionately fewer writing assignments in the public schools. This makes sense since grading writing assignments is particularly time consuming. It appeared that public and private teachers put in about the same amount of time evaluating written work, which means that the publics have to give fewer such assignments. Beyond this I saw one other difference, the privates were much more responsive to questions from parents and potential parents. Again I think this is driven in part by time constraints. It may also be due to the fact that unhappy parents are much more harmful to a private school than to a public since they can vote with their children's feet. These were public schools in upper middle class neighborhoods. In schools with a broader spectrum of students, there might also be a significant difference in the discipline issues within the schools since the private schools have the option of expelling students more easily than public schools. This could explain the relatively good track record of catholic schools in inner city neighborhoods. Although this may also be explained by greater parent involvement.</p>
<p>I disagree the writing required in my public high school was extensive as in a paper about every two weeks. It really depends upon the school. And several writing assignments in between, before the english AP we had an In class essay literally about every other day.
In addition, what you get out of high school is entirely contigent upon you. I mean even if you got to the best high school if you don't take the most challenging courses you won't get anything out of it. Conversely though if you take regular classes at a public high school the curriculum can be very different than the AP classes offered (which are generally taught by the best and most experienced teachers which is why my experience at a public school has been great in terms of didatic methods).
But I would argue that the biggest benefit of going to a public school is class rank. I mean at a public school you have a wide spectrum so it is easier to be near the top, but at private schools (especially those that are selective) your classmates can really hurt you to get into top schools.</p>
<p>Interestingly, I've observed that sometimes private schools can be less responsive. Two family members were unable to get accommodations for kids who needed to be accelerated in math in private schools, while I had no problem doing it in public school, both at the elementary and middle school level. The private schools seemed to have a take it or leave it attitude.</p>
<p>Smaller class sizes, higher academic expectations, more consistent discipline, and less social work in the guise of education -- that about sums it up here too, whether you're talking privates or charters. Not all privates/charters are good or even ethical -- but among the good ones, I think these are the distinguishing features for the most part.</p>
<p>@mathmom: Yes, I know of a few charter schools that are unresponsive in that way, or in the other direction. Some charters around here will not accommodate special-needs students in any way; the ones they (legally) have to take, they make especially unwelcome and make it clear that those students are unlikely to succeed there. Gives other charters and privates a bad name.</p>
<p>I think it so much depends on the schools in question, as others have mentioned. I do not think that private schools necessarily are better.</p>
<p>Our D goes to a private school that goes from K to 12. The reasons for it (or my justification for the 10k tuition!) are the ones below but they may not be true for other privates or they may be easily found in some public schools:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Small classes and individual attention. Never more than 20, each advisory (a class that meets everyday with the same teacher over many years) has just 14 students, and for jr and sr courses, some classes have just 5 students in them. </p></li>
<li><p>Students are selected so the teachers have the ease of teaching at a fast pace, and absolutely zero behavioral issues or learning challenges. </p></li>
<li><p>Great connection between school and home, as well as parenting advice and support. Tons of communcation. My emails are answered within a hour; I can see the principal or teachers usually the same day and no limit on our time together. Tons of support that is both casual and formalized via parenting lectures, programs etc. etc.. </p></li>
<li><p>A set of classmates very focused on academics and school work and so the 'peer pressure' is of a mostly positive kind. Its a good sign when your teen has to read the paper in the morning so they don't feel out of the loop with their classmates during lunch. </p></li>
<li><p>Fabulous facilities. State of the art science labs. Amazing art studios. Very good library. An entire library and study space JUST for researching colleges. Top notch fields, tennis courts, pool. Each classroom has laptops, french doors to an outdoor space and so on. </p></li>
<li><p>A strong positive learning culture that doesn't just teach courses, but teaches kids how to learn, how to study, how to critically evaluate their world around them. They invest a lot in developing the whole child in terms of character, athletics, artistry (far beyond just knowledge acquired). </p></li>
<li><p>It's a very nice teaching environment so they can have more choice in quality of teachers. Also a plus? When we had a new but problematic teacher and we parents complained, that teacher was replaced. </p></li>
<li><p>This school does well in terms of university placements, both types of school (e.g. number going to Ivy) and scholarships/merit. Just not possible to get the same kinds of outcomes from a public school where we live. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Downsides?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Same kids year after year! Strong cultures and everyone knowing everyone may not always be a good thing.</p></li>
<li><p>Small school and years so not able to offer as many electives or AP classes as other larger schools. But I rationalize that the universities judge students on the basis of the context in which they go to school.</p></li>
<li><p>The cost over 12 years is the cost of a college degree!</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I'd agree with mathmom. In places like NYC, where wait lists are as long as the current student rosters at $32K/yr private schools (we New Yorkers experience jaw drop when we read the above list for $10K), they don't have to be particularly responsive to parents.</p>
<p>Advantages are indeed small classes (max 12 in most where my kids attended), lots of one-on-one with teachers, ability to meet student needs (post AP classes for those who wanted them), LD classes in some schools.</p>
<p>There are all levels of privates in big cities--some where kids need extra help, others where the average SAT score is 2150. So it becomes more like a college search--finding the best match.</p>
<p>There are private schools in some towns where people send their kids because the public schools are too competitive, so there's that side too.</p>
<p>Parochial schools like the one you describe John are often seen by parents as being a safer environment or one with less behavior problems than in poorly run public schools. And some parents want the religious component.</p>
<ol>
<li>Same kids year after year! Strong cultures and everyone knowing everyone may not always be a good thing.
starbright makes some excellent points. Just a different perspective on this one, though... being in a very small school with the "same kids year after year" has been good for my son and an advantage noted by several students who preceded him at the school. In a very small school, kids can't escape one another -- they have to learn to get along because they'll be stuck together in classes, ECs, and other settings. If the student body is very homogeneous, probably not such a great advantage -- but in geek_son's case, having to work out relationships with other students he didn't particularly like was a great source of growth for him. When one of his older homeroom-mates went to a very large college, she found that she was much better prepared than many of her classmates for the social diversity she encountered there. She was already very good at getting along productively with people whose background, personalities, and even core values were quite different from her own. Like I said, just another perspective.</li>
</ol>
<p>Just the thing I am not understanding in my particular and I dont expect anyone to answer this is how can my school justify that its students are more academically prepared for college when we dont have access to the vast number of courses the nearby public school has. I mean if I was able to I would have taken AP Bio, AP Physics, I should have been able to take AP USH, and AP Gov (this my deal with the less responsiveness of private high schools got As both semesters of World History which should have put me in AP but it didnt and when I received my schedule it was too late to make any changes because the schedules are final I dont understand why they ask you to submit schedule changes in writing if the school just tells you that but I digress).</p>
<p>My point being I feel unless the parochial school I attend goes further in depth or covers more in the course material I feel like I am at an academic disadvantage when I get to college than students who had the oppurtunity to take more challenging and in depth courses at the public school. And this infuriates me because my school "prides itself on being more academically stimulating than the other schools in the area. Now I will say I cant speak for the public schools but overall if I had been in a more academically challenging and stimulating environment I can probably would have performed a lot better and maybe could even be looking at the schools the rest of CC is looking at. </p>
<p>Another funny thing I feel like bringing up is my school basically tries to get as many students as possible to go to the University of Michigan Dearborn a flagship campus of UMich Ann Arbor. They are unforgiving with this. It is pushed on the upper classmen daily to choose UMich Dearborn and I dont no why. But again I kind of digress. </p>
<p>I just feel like my parents made the wrong choice for me academically. I am doing very well socially. But I feel like we were cheated out of 4200 a year</p>
<p>we New Yorkers experience jaw drop when we read the above list for $10K</p>
<p>not just NYC, in * Seattle* elementary school is more than $10K and it is double that for high school.
But teachers have more autonomy than in public- you have strong heads of school and a supportive community.</p>
<p>John, the way AP classes are taught at many schools, they do not prepare you for college classes. Don't equate a stack of AP classes with excellence -- there are other variables. At some private schools (and excellent publics, too), upper level classes can be quite rigorous without the AP label. What matters is how the teacher teaches the material. </p>
<p>And you need to consider your GPA in context with the school you go to -- that's what most colleges do. Your GPA at a public might have been higher, but that's like comparing apples to oranges -- grading systems vary from school to school.</p>
<p>John, a school may have many reasons for not designating its classes "AP." Our school offers no AP-designated classes, but many of our students take several AP tests and get 4s and 5s. The school doesn't want to give up any control over its curriculum for the sake of labeling classes according to someone else's standards.</p>
<p>Especially in the case of a parochial school, philosophical differences and concerns over control may have a lot to do with the designations. And the number of courses available to students is not necessarily a measure of academic quality or rigor. Your school may have a philosophy that every student should master a certain liberal arts core before heading for college and specialization; in most such schools, that doesn't leave much room for a zillion electives.</p>
<p>What you should focus on is how well you are prepared for the academic and social environment you will encounter in college. How your school compares with the public school down the street is immaterial at this point, imho.</p>
<p>Ah, sorry! We used to live in NYC and our D's preschool tuition was higher than her highschool tuition! I know from where you speak. But we are in Canada now which explains the differential (tuition is less in general at all levels, but also I converted and the exchange rate makes it look more favorable). </p>
<p>I agree with Geek_mom that the small environment, same students isn't always a bad thing. There have been huge benefits to the staff and teachers knowing my D for so many years. And she loves her school and friends, but I know there have been times in prior developmental yeras when she wanted to 'break free' from her identity there (hard to do when people have known you all your life). </p>
<p>John, I see your point. I think AP isn't the end all, be all. I'm far from having the expertise of other parents on cc regarding AP but I get the sense that not all AP courses are the same. I'd want to know how those kids do on the exams. You can have a demanding curriculum that prepares you for college without AP courses. Maybe I'm biased though because up here in Canada, APs are not nearly as popular but the HS students do not seem underchallenged and do fine in university.</p>
<p>Many of the top private schools in the Country have no IB or AP classes.</p>
<p>Starbright, sounds like you traded up! I've talked to several Canadian colleagues who have sent their kids to great schools for amazingly reasonable cost.</p>
<p>My kid's private high school has a full IB program. Not just a few courses, but an IB degree program. It has excellent facilities, including the best woodworking shop I've seen anywhere (not just in a high school, but anywhere short of an industrial production facility). Both these things were important to me, because I wanted my child to get not only first-rate academics, but also good exposure to skilled manual labor.</p>
<p>This school has very little grade inflation. Very few students get straight A's. This cuts both ways. It means the classes are truly challenging. It also has meant watching friends from middle school (kids he considered his academic peers) skate through with 4.0 averages, and relatively homework, while he works hours per night for a B+ average.</p>
<p>This school also has a very diverse student body, including many internationals. Many teachers have advanced degrees and many years of experience. His math instructor in Junior year is an Amherst grad with 30 years experience, who teaches entirely from his own materials. You do not see a lot of cheesy Texas Board of Education Approved textbooks in the classes; relatively much of the teaching is from primary sources.</p>
<p>I could go on and on. There is just no comparison between my kid's private HS and what he would have gotten from our local public school.</p>
<p>My experience is similar to mathmom. My private (Catholic, all-girl) high school had strong literature and writing classes, but was spotty in math and science back then (physics class had kids who had not had trig, so we didn't learn anything needing trig!) My kids in our local public have a lot fewer writing assignments, I think because the teachers don't want to be grading 150 papers a week, and it shows in their disappointing writing ability. Now they are adding high school reading classes to improve comprehension and writing, which I thought was what high school English classes should be teaching already!</p>
<p>We got the contract for next year in the mail yesterday. While we will only have one there next year, it'll be 20k plus books, fees, and the ever present Annual Fund expectations. But it is worth every penny to our family and yes, I do believe they are much better prepared than their public school counterpart. Yes, it's about the writing and the small class size, but it's also about the expectations in the classroom via discussion, etc and how they engage the kids in learning. There is much more communication and kids are held accountable at a very early age so that by the time they are at the Upper School, they are really quite independent and self-directed. Kids who need accommodation can and do get them, but the goal is really to create self-advocacy. And for us, who had one child graduate from the large public school, the biggest difference for our younger two has been when they go to ask a teacher a question or raise their hand in class, their inquiries are not only welcomed but encouraged. Sure beats sighs and rolled eyes from teachers who can't be bothered to do much of anything beyond what their Teachers union contract specifies. And from many many accounts, when the kids go off to college we hear stories where their roommates will lament that they have 2-3 hours of homework a night when our kids are saying I ONLY have 2-3 hours of homework!</p>