<p>But that statement that the public schools “were unfit” is exactly the type of rationalization and stereotyping that I am talking about. My kids attended the same public elementary and high schools that parents of kids in private schools saw as “unfit”. But my experience with the schools was generally positive. </p>
<p>My kids were both identified as gifted, but attended school in a low-wealth district without a formalized program for gifted students – I’m mentioning that not to boast, but just to make it clear that my kids were highly capable students in a school district that was far from stellar. Did the schools have problems? Yes. But would I label the schools “unfit”? No.</p>
<p>Obviously I don’t know where you live or what the schools are like there… but California schools “rank” pretty near the bottom, so I don’t think I’m crazy in suspecting that you would also deem the schools my kids attended as “unfit”. </p>
<p>The big difference that I saw as a parent between the local private schools and the public schools, is that the parents of the kids at the private schools had more money. There was also a lot more hype about what the schools offered – but when I toured the classrooms at some of the private schools, despite all the hype, I didn’t see all that much different going on inside the classrooms than at the public schools.</p>
<p>The problem is many people think the universities they attend, the positions they hold, and/or the amount of money in the bank defines them. If your child is a lazy bum sending him/her to a “top” is not necessarily going to change him/her. There are also parents that believe that if their child attends “that” university instead of “this” university the child will fail at life.</p>
<p>The most idiotic part is that in the age of the Internet there’s still people that believe the “top” institutions offer a radically different education from other institutions. Certainly, there are some “cosmetic” differences between institutions, mainly in the realm of popular perception. Nonetheless, I can easily check what book is used for Math 55 at Harvard; I also have access to the great classics of literature; or I may e-mail a student at those institutions and establish a professional relationship.</p>
<p>But please, don’t let my argument dissuade you from sending your child to a top institution (of course, it won’t); I’d like to keep my tuition costs, class space, etc. at my public university as low as possible.</p>
<p>I do think that there are qualitative differences – it is also a rationalization to deny that. I mean… I’m not going to argue that a Ford Focus is a better quality car than a BMW, just because one is in my price range and another isn’t. But the point is, if I am going to be using a car for a 30 mile daily commute to and from work, leaving it sitting in a lot for most of the day… then I wouldn’t really be enjoying all the benefits of the luxury car in any case. </p>
<p>I think that the mistake is simply in assuming that the qualitative differences are consistent and across-the-board, or that a given student is going to take advantage of the qualitative differences. </p>
<p>In hindsight I am glad that my d. had the opportunity to attend an elite college – in part because she did make the most of that opportunity. She graduated with top honors and that, in combination with the elite degree, is obviously going to have collateral benefits in terms of applying to graduate programs; I’m sure it also helped tremendously in getting a job. She has friends who graduated with B averages who have not really enjoyed the same elite college boost. </p>
<p>I don’t think that Math 55 at Harvard really depends on a “book” – I think that is a course that is going to really need a gifted instructor at the helm. (Someone who is actually smarter than his students and able to inspire them). </p>
<p>On the other hand… my d. is the perfect example of a math-challenged student who certainly would not benefit from the presence of similar courses on her campus. Of course she studied as little math as possible, and pretty much opted for her campus’ “statistics for dummies” course to fulfill her college math requirements --so a lot depends on the student. </p>
<p>My son is probably much better off long term because of the benefits he got from attending a lower-tier state U., chief of which is “forgiveness”. In hindsight, it would have been a huge mistake for him to have remained at his pricey LAC and tried to slog things out after his lackluster beginning there. He would have ended up down the line with a very expensive and totally useless designer college degree.</p>
I like this, and agree wholeheartedly. Ivy league schools are (or should be) where they are today due to dedicated, passionate, bright faculties that teach and research better than anyone else in their field. (I also know that the best researcher is often not the best teacher, and vice versa, so this may be a team effort.) There are great faculty at many public schools too, or sometimes great faculty in a specific program at a relative unknown school, and I wish more parents would keep an eye on that instead of judging by a brand name or preconceptions. I wouldn’t go as far to compare a top (or at least good) public to a Ford Focus vs. BMW comparison, but I do know what you’re saying. I think in some cases it’s more of a Lexus vs. Mercedes comparison. One has long standing prestige and a 100+ year history, and the other does a very similar or equally good job at a slightly lower price, but lacks the track record and long-standing prestige, which apparently makes it inferior.
One issue that is prevalent on CC that does not actually exist in the real world to the extent some posters on here claim is the inability of public school students to get into medical school, top graduate programs, etc. and I often see it used as justification for going to a school with prestige, etc. regardless of the student’s ability. Apparently we are producing statistical anomalies here, because they’re getting into top (including ivy) med, grad, and law schools, as are dozens, likely hundreds, of other state schools out there.
I think this April 2000 New York Times article: [Economic</a> Scene - Children smart enough to get into elite schools may not need to bother. - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/27/business/economic-scene-children-smart-enough-get-into-elite-schools-may-not-need-bother.html]Economic”>http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/27/business/economic-scene-children-smart-enough-get-into-elite-schools-may-not-need-bother.html)
and the more recent 2010 BNET article about the different studies out there (including the one I just mentioned): [Is</a> That $50,000-a-Year College Worth It? | Personal Success | BNET](<a href=“MoneyWatch: Financial news, world finance and market news, your money, product recalls updated daily - CBS News”>MoneyWatch: Financial news, world finance and market news, your money, product recalls updated daily - CBS News)
offer a healthy dose of reality to the mixture. I’m a firm believer in “fit”, and I don’t for a second believe every single student should attend, or would be better off, attending my school, just like I don’t believe every student should, or would be better off, attending Harvard. But I don’t think parents, or students, should limit their searches based off of public/private or elite/unknown criteria before they get a sense for where they’d be happy and successful, which luckily most of you on here are kind enough to help them find.
-Matt</p>
Actually, I didn’t mean to draw any particular category, other than comparing “good car” with “better car.” (I haven’t driven a Ford lately, ha, ha, – but I’m assuming that the vehicles they sell these days are roadworthy). </p>
<p>The thrust of my point really was that – if my primary usage is going to be driving back & forth to work and to the supermarket… then there’s no real benefit to me in having the luxury vehicle. If, on the other hand, I had a career or lifestyle that meant that I was frequently going to be driving people around, I might want a car that is more comfortable and roomy than the downscale economy car I currently drive. </p>
<p>But the point is also if you simply make a broad comparison – and you asked, “which car is better, Ford or BMW?” – everyone would agree, “BMW”. But if you ask… which car gets better gas mileage? Well, you’d have to do some research, but without knowing anything more, I’d suspect the Ford Focus. Which car is more crashworthy? Now I have to really start doing research…</p>
<p>When it comes to colleges, there is a lot more to look at and consider than when comparing cars. But the point is the same.</p>
<p>One of my children is at a state school and one is at a top private. They are both having good experiences, but there is no question that the one at the top private is meeting people from all over the world, from a variety of backgrounds, whereas my in-state child has primarily met people from our own state. If it is possible to have a wider geographic representation, I think it benefits the growth of the individual. Of course, that isn’t always possible, but I do think one of the negatives about most in-state publics is their insular nature, at least geographically.</p>
<p>I also have a student at the state flagship (honors) and a student at a tip-top LAC. They are both getting excellent educations --in some ways the one at the state flagship is getting a bit better one due to the vast array of classes available, but both are excellent. </p>
<p>Unlike Delta66’s experience though, I think my state flagship kid is getting exposure to a more diverse group of student backgrounds. No, the state school does not come anywhere near the private school’s representation of students from different regions and different countries. However, those students from all around the world are a very similar kind of student – virtually all the same age, all with quite similar academic aptitude, test scores and educational backgrounds (strong schools, AP classes, etc.) The ethinicities, nationalities represented are impressive. However in state school kid’s classes, when they read a novel written about WWII or the Vietman war, she has students in the classroom with her who are just back from Iraq or Afghanistan. She has students from a much wider range of ages and the perspective that brings. She also said the other day that she appreciates having people around her who have made mistakes… who did not leave high school as academic overachievers, but have found their way to where they are in more idiosyncratic ways.</p>
<p>It is true that the honors college at her school is more homogenous in terms of ages and academic backgrounds (similar to my son’s private school), and she enjoys here classes in the honors college greatly, but she also very much appreciates the diversity of experiences that comes with a large public institution.</p>
<p>I think the point some people are trying to make is while this might be true for the particular state school your child is attending, it’s not true for all state universities and therefore, it’s hard to make this kind of generalization and have it be totally accurate.</p>
<p>32% of the students at my son’s state flagship come from out of state. 17% are minorities. I don’t have the statistics for international students but I suspect it’s high. And there is no doubt that the students come from a large variety of backgrounds. That is not always the case at an expensive private school (although it could be - I’m obviously generalizing here) where you might be likely to have a high percentage of middle and upper middle class students who can afford the tuition. Actually, variety of backgrounds was one of the reasons my son choose the state school vs. a private. He has been in an expensive, small private school K-12, where everyone was upper-middle class to downright weathly and he wanted to meet people from more diverse backgrounds. He didn’t think he would get that at a private school. Funny how everyone’s perceptions on private vs. public schools differ so much.</p>
<p>Calmom, you made a great point about qualitative differences and how a student may take advantage of these qualitative differences. </p>
<p>My main point is that a motivated, intelligent person is capable of obtaining a “good education” anywhere, anytime. Some students may need a “gifted teacher” at the helm of a Math 55 class while others may simply require the book and learn the material on their own just as well; once again we fall into the misconception that there’s only one, and only one method of doing things.</p>
<p>What baffles me is that many people do not realize what they are actually paying for when they attend a “top” private institution. Hint: they are not paying for “good education.” What these people are purchasing are job placement services with a side order of education; people are paying thousands of dollars for a diploma that says <insert top=“” university=“” here=“”> at the top with expectations of obtaining a great job.</insert></p>
<p>Even more baffling is that people continue falling for this trick. The “top” universities advertise they will provide a “great” education to students that attend said universities and the only condition is that those students must fall within a narrow, specific range in order to enter. Of course these universities will deliver what they promised; in this situation, failing is actually harder than succeeding. All the university needs is plenty of capital to provide educational tools and these bright students will go to work. </p>
<p>In contrast, state universities have a much tougher job since they have to educate students from an ample range of abilities and we have the nerve of saying these state universities are “inferior”?</p>
<p>How about this: what if these “top” institutions became accessible to anyone that wishes to enter? Would these institutions deliver the same “quality”? Of course, this is unlikely to happen. The problem with this situation is that it places intelligent students that attended other institutions at a disadvantage after their college career is complete.</p>
<p>Enginox- That’s a bunch of c@ap and more rationalization. There is much more to an education at a highly-selective school than you could even imagine. I am able to see the value in both strong state universities AND the selective private schools. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but saying that there is no value provided by the top privates is simply ignorant.</p>
<p>Calmom- The public schools in Dallas are terrible and I wasn’t about to send my kids there. There are families who work very hard to make the schools work for them and who are very committed to public education. These families usually had a stay at home Mom who spent lots of time navigating the waters at the school. That wasn’t going to work for our family. The private schools weren’t perfect, either, and both my kids wound up (for different reasons) going to boarding school.</p>
<p>Matt- I hear what you are trying to say, but I know a lot about the Arkansas educational system and it simply isn’t that great. It just isn’t. There are excellent schools in every state, but trying to argue that Arkansas is way up there is not going to fly. I love my current home state, but the overall educational system is lacking, too. But we can’t all live in Minnesota or CT!</p>
<p>My older son would no doubt do very well anywhere, but I do think that being around other top computer science kids has pushed him to perform at levels he might not otherwise. His peers also have alerted him to available internships and opportunities. There’s also just a critical math of kids like him. I’m sure he could have found kids like him in a state university, but would he have made the effort? He stumbles over them at CMU. For the first time in his life (except for a few weeks at CTY for a few summers) he’s perfectly normal.</p>
<p>I can’t say anything about highly selective schools based on first hand experience. I respect that all the Ivies are making it possible financially for the middle and lower classes economically to go, if one is admitted, which means, for all practical purposes, not very many. But that is okay because you have to earn your way in and if you get in they will help you pay for it. I respect that. </p>
<p>But I agree with Enginox. </p>
<p>The large “flagship” type public schools have copied enough of the Ivy and Ivy wannabee’s ideas, with Honors colleges and travel abroad opps, that suddenly the Ivies can’t just assume they will get the best and the brightest. The large public schools remind me of the US auto manufacturing industry, once hopelessly behind foreign manufacturers in quality and value, but who got better because they had to compete or die off. </p>
<p>Competition makes you better. It always works. </p>
<p>I see very little difference, again from what I can tell, based on working with grads of selective schools and places with swinging doors for admission, in the products of these colleges. The public educated crowd is just as sharp in many cases. That is all you really need to know. </p>
<p>The Ivies are cool because their FA makes them a good value. However, the tier below that is asking $50+ per year, they’ll give you $30 in aid, but $5 of that is loans, so it is only $25 per year in aid meaning the net cost per year is well over $25 per year. Add that up for 4 years and then you still have to pay for grad school. </p>
<p>In this economy when a job after college is uncertain? </p>
<p>Uh, no. </p>
<p>The public schools are simply going to thrive in this environment. It is unavoidable unless the schools not giving Ivy League type FA are doing something I don’t know about.</p>
<p>Rationalization: The public schools in [INSERT NAME OF HUGE CITY] are terrible.</p>
<p>Truth: Dallas is a huge city with more than one public school district, within which the quality of schools is variable. There are schools with very poor performance and schools with excellent performance, and everything in between. Parents who are financially able to foot the cost of private schools are also more likely to either live in the neighborhoods or be able to afford to move into the neighborhoods served by the better public schools. </p>
<p>Rationalization: Public school can only work for stay-at-home Moms.</p>
<p>Truth: Many kids in public school have working moms; in fact, many come from single parent households. </p>
<p>Do you really think that I didn’t hear the same things said to me over and over again about the schools my kid’s attended, by parents who opted for private school instead? </p>
<p>Are you saying that working moms like me are terrible parents because we allowed our kids to enter the doors of schools in “terrible” districts? </p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with parents who opt to send their kids to private schools, but I don’t understand why they have a need to disparage the public schools in the process. I mean – if I hear something specific about an individual school, its one thing. I know there are differences – when my son was 5 I lived in urban district and I visited the school that he would have been assigned to. I didn’t like it. We lived right across the boundary line for assignment to another school, and I visited the other school and liked it a lot better. I petitioned to get my son assigned to the different school-- and the petition was granted. As it happened, we moved over the summer and my son didn’t end up attending either school. Instead, he attended the charter school in another district I managed to get him into, after finding out about in a phone conversation with whoever answered the phone at the district office in the place we moved. In any case, I certainly can’t generalize about a whole district or even a whole school based on something I liked or didn’t like in a single classroom – all I was seeing were particular teachers in a particular classrooms on a given day.</p>
<p>I never implied education at the “top” institutions had no value. These institutions, just like most institutions in the US or even a good public library, provide a solid education. However, the “top” institutions do not have a monopoly on whatever it is we call “good education.” </p>
<p>I’d like to know what “much more” is present at these “top” institutions that other institutions may not provide. I’m certain the offerings are mostly “cosmetic” in nature. Still, students at “top” institutions gain access to a “special” social network and obtain a brand-name college degree that increases the chances of a high-paying position. And that’s a problem; it seems the main purpose of the “top” institution is to increase a student’s chances of landing a lucrative gig rather than to shape well-rounded, educated individuals (that’s a byproduct, no?). I wonder how many people would attend the “top” institutions if the quality of education remained the same or higher but wouldn’t lead to any kind of job?</p>
<p>Or what if some of these institutions offered many of their courses for free but without granting a degree? Oh wait, MIT does that; It seems MIT knows many people are not paying for the education but the degree.</p>
<p>But hey, this is America. The land where we think bigger, faster, more expensive, etc. is better.</p>
I hope not. If anyone thinks that is what they are getting, they will be sadly disappointed. </insert></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with you, but I also have seen the difference in overall quality at different colleges. I don’t thing its merely a public v. private thing – but I think my d has had a pretty amazing education at her private college, and I do think that qualitatively it is better than what I got at a UC campus, or what my son got at a different private LAC or at a public CSU. </p>
<p>But that’s not to say that every student needs that, or has to strive for that. And my d’s experience certainly wasn’t uniform – she had some profs and classes that were pretty bad along the way. And one of her most amazing teachers was a studio art teacher she had while studying abroad – in fact she enjoyed that class so much that I looked at her college catalog when she got back to see if she could take some studio art classes her senior year, just for fun – and was disappointed at the very sparse offerings at her school, especially compared to my son’s CSU which has a very large and will respected studio art department. My d. is not an artist, so it never occurred to us to look into art classes when she was applying to colleges – I just assumed, mistakenly, that all good colleges had strong art departments, with a healthy smattering of courses available to non-majors. Another mistaken assumption my daughter made along the way was assuming that her chosen college would offer a linguistics major … ooops. (Doesn’t matter, my d. enrolled in one of the small handful of linguistics classes offered during her first semester,and discovered that linguistics wasn’t her thing after all.) </p>
<p>I don’t really understands why someone feels the need to disparage the quality of something else in order to rationalize their position. I can look at the quality of my daughter’s undergraduate thesis and compare it to papers my son was turning in as a college senior --(same major, no thesis requirement for him - while d. had to produce a 75 page opus, son could get by with a 10 page essay here and there) – and there is no doubt that the academic expectations at my d’s college were higher. But my son’s college gave him an opportunity of a lifetime – an internship that he wouldn’t have and couldn’t have gotten anywhere else. Nothing that my d’s college gave her compares – my d. had a pretty awesome internship of her own during college, but she arranged it on her own, and her college had nothing to with it. </p>
<p>I think the experience each student gets is highly individualized. I think that there is a lot of hidden treasure to be found at public universities – including all sorts of fellowships and funded internships and research opportunities that exist because the money comes from government resources or from private philanthropic organizations more comfortable with directing their money towards public institutions. Private colleges have their own funding and their own donor supported programs. Students opting for private colleges sometimes make the mistake of believing that they are getting something – such as study abroad opportunities – that doesn’t exist in the public realm, which simply is not true.</p>
<p>calmom- You don’t know anything about the state of the Dallas public schools 5-8 years ago. You simply don’t. And-many very nice neighborhoods were within the city limits and zoned for Dallas schools. The large “good” suburban schools had a whole other set of problems- serial suicides in some, huge drug problems and “Texas cheerleader mom” situations. I assure you that your kids would not have been attending Dallas schools. </p>
<p>A bright, motivated student can do just fine at a state university. There are lots of opportunities. I believe my kids had every bit as many opportunities at their private colleges (Rice and Penn). There were lots of reasons the state university wasn’t the right choice for my kids, including one being an athletic recruit and one choosing a particular major. It certainly isn’t all about what job you get at the end of the 4 years, although neither of my kids had any trouble getting jobs or into grad school. </p>
<p>I WENT to a state flagship. I know my peers. I know all my friends who graduated from various state flagships. We talk about college- our experiences and the experiences of our kids. To say Arkansas/OU/TN et al is going to be the same as Harvard/Penn/Rice/Wash U is simply not correct. As I said- positives and negatives to both. I happen to like a fun athletic scene. You don’t get that at the Ivy schools or most privates.</p>
<p>Hey, if our son got into an Ivy, we probably (maybe) would have paid for an Ivy, as long as the fit was OK. I see the value of being with smart peers, and of having a “name” brand for career purposes. He did not get in to the one Ivy he applied to. He DID however, get into the next layer down, the Boston College, Wake Forest, Emory, Vanderbilt type colleges. Most of these were at a full price tag. Now, when you compare his state flagship honors college (very selective and respected) WITH multiple scholarships against this next layer down, we (including our son) found it hard to justify the extra cost. Over 100K more for four years.</p>
<p>The four years at the state flagship honors college are now complete. Study abroad, smaller classes, a paid teaching assistant role for two full semesters, a terrific GPA, a thesis, solid relationships/references from a few select professors. Money in his pocket vs loans (from a saved scholarship). So pretty good I’d say. Even with all this he DID have somewhat of a challenge finding a job. But he persisted and is on a good track now with a large company locally. Perhaps the Ivy name would have helped a bit here…but I guess I still doubt that a Wake Forest or Boston College would have made much of a dent. But who knows really?</p>
<p>I think we try to guide our kids to make the best choices for their futures. Private vs public is WAY down on the list of concerns. Find a good fit that you can afford.</p>
<p>My son and his friends and many of their classmates at Penn. This is bar-talk! When he meets girls at a party at State U and they don’t know who Bernie Madoff is, he views this as a problem.</p>