Students do better in public schools

[CFLarsen]

Students do better in private schools, according to common wisdom -- and some well-regarded data now more than two decades old.

But a recent study of standardized math scores in more than 1,300 public and private schools says the opposite may be true, according to Sarah and Christopher Lubienski, education professors at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Public school students from similar social and economic backgrounds tested higher in a national math achievement test than their peers in private schools, the Lubienskis say in an article to be published in the May issue of Phi Delta Kappan, an influential education journal.

...

The achievement and survey data used in the researchers' study came from the 2000 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the most recent annual assessment for which raw data were available to researchers.

The NAEP is considered the only nationally representative ongoing assessment of U.S. academic achievement.

The samples used in the research included more than 13,000 fourth-grade students in 607 schools (385 public and 222 private) and more than 15,000 eighth-grade students in 740 schools (383 public and 357 private).

Sarah Lubienski's first look at the data showed private schools outperforming publics overall in math achievement, which was no surprise and in line with most research. "But if you look at kids of equal socioeconomic class, the kids in public schools are outperforming the equivalent kids in private schools," she said.
Source

A huge body of data, I must say.

Very interesting.

 

[geni]

That article makes no sense in UK English.

 

[CFLarsen]

That article makes no sense in UK English.

What do you mean?

 

[Darat]

What do you mean?

Public schools are private schools in the UK.

And I'm pretty sure the public schools over here do perform (overall) better then state schools.

 

[CFLarsen]

Public schools are private schools in the UK.

Ah. I could have told myself that. After all, you also drive in the wrong side of the road...

 

[Tricky]

Here's something very telling about the article

Sarah Lubienski's first look at the data showed private schools outperforming publics overall in math achievement, which was no surprise and in line with most research. "But if you look at kids of equal socioeconomic class, the kids in public schools are outperforming the equivalent kids in private schools."

So public schools actually score better, but when you adjust the figures for other factors, they are worse. What a shocker!

Of course, there are several reasons why people go to private schools in the first place. One is to get a better education, and these students tend to go to more expensive, somewhat elite schools. Naturally, the number of "disadvantaged" kids is somewhat small in these schools.

Another reason is because of religious preference. These schools may or may not be better than publicly funded schools and have a wider cross-section of socioeconomic classes, but they are often very lax in certain science-related curricula. Not surprising that they might perform more poorly in math achievement.

Yet another reason, less common than in previous years, but still quite strong, especially in the South, is for segregation, either racial or ethnic. These schools are created solely for the reason of preventing the children from having to interact with "undesirable" classmates. Many of these schools are simply atrocious, with scarce much more required of the teachers than they be bigots. These schools are often attended by some of the very low socioeconomic classes and with the poor quality of teaching, it is unusurprising that they underperform public schools.

Now, you take these three (and maybe some other kinds) of private schools and lump them together, and voila! you reach the conclusion that private schools are worse than public schools.

I'd have to say this was a poorly run study, even though it supports public schooling, a cause that I favor very strongly. But I don't want my support propped up by bogus statistics. Why don't they break down the private schools into different types and compare them?

 

[jay gw]

And I'm pretty sure the public schools over here do perform (overall) better then state schools.

No evidence for that.

Why would schools not affiliated with the state be called "public"?

Private schools don't admit anyone off the street. That's why parents send their children there. People that use private schools don't care if the quality of education is as good as other schools. It's the quality of the student body they're concerned about.

Schools in urban areas have VERY bad crime/gang problems, and tons of drugs. Parents don't care if they have to sacrifice a little in other areas to get out of that cesspit.

 

[Meadmaker]

The research I have been reading lately suggests that public and private schools do approximately equally well, when adjusted for socioeconomic conditions.

However, one thing that must be borne in mind is that the results are based on standardized testing. I can say with certainty that my child's (public) school "teaches the test". Their curriculum is geared toward improving test scores on standardized tests just like the ones used in the study. A private school would be much less likely to use that as their guiding principle.

Another aspect of the research I have been reading is that public schools do better in areas where students have a choice. In other words, if there are school choice programs, such as open enrollment, charter schools, vouchers, or widely available and inexpensive private schools, the public schools do a better job.

 

[Thanz]

Without seeing the raw data, it is hard to say, but it seems that the study is actually evidence for the assertion that regardless of school, people with a higher socioeconomic status do better in education. If we accept the proposition that private school kids, as a whole, have a higher socioeconomic status than those in public schools, it may be the only way to interpret the data.

The data says that overall, private schools score better on the math tests. But, when you compare socioeconomic groups, the public kids do better than their counter parts in every group. We must then ask why, if the public do better than the private in each group, do they do worse overall? It must be because the private has a higher percentage of high achievers, and the public a higher percentage of low achievers. We know that private schools have more "rich" kids than "poor" kids. So, these rich kids, on aggregate, must do much better than the poor kids - raising the average higher than the public schools, who are dragged down by the "poor" kids.

I do not want to be seen as slagging poor people as dumb, because I don't believe that. But I think that it shows that there is much more to education than what happens at school - which may be lost in a school voucher debate.

 

[jay gw]

School vouchers:

School vouchers, also known as scholarships, redirect the flow of education funding, channeling it directly to individual families rather than to school districts. This allows families to select the public or private schools of their choice and have all or part of the tuition paid.

Scholarships are advocated on the grounds that parental choice and competition between public and private schools will improve education for all children. Vouchers can be funded and administered by the government, by private organizations, or by some combination of both.

http://www.schoolchoices.org/roo/vouchers.htm

 

[a_unique_person]

I read a study that claimed that students from public schools did better than those from private schools once they went to University. The reason given was that those from private schools did not have the self-motivation, they were to used to being pushed to achieve. When they went to University, where it is up to the individual entirely, many private school students just didn't have the skills needed.

As for private schools, they also skew their data by offering scholarships for high achieving students.

I recently heard about a student at a private school who was there on a sports scholarship. When he became injured and could not play football anymore, the was summarily turfed out, midway through the year.

They are pretty ruthless.

 

[Grammatron]

I read a study that claimed that students from public schools did better than those from private schools once they went to University. The reason given was that those from private schools did not have the self-motivation, they were to used to being pushed to achieve. When they went to University, where it is up to the individual entirely, many private school students just didn't have the skills needed.

As for private schools, they also skew their data by offering scholarships for high achieving students.

I recently heard about a student at a private school who was there on a sports scholarship. When he became injured and could not play football anymore, the was summarily turfed out, midway through the year.

They are pretty ruthless.

Provide the link then, because I once read a study how people make things up and use fictional studies as their source for the fib.

 

[Darat]

No evidence for that.

Why would schools not affiliated with the state be called "public"?

...snip...

Well a short answer is "because they are", however the reasons go back many centuries, to before there was even an USA, indeed some of our public schools predate the discovery of the American continent by Columbus.

Anyhow Eton I believe holds the honour of being the first to describe itself as a "public" school. And the "public" meant that it was open to (allegedly) any fee paying child rather then a closed religious school only open to someone of a particular faith.

 

[Iamme]

CFLarson---You're right! I have proof. This Sunday, I was watching a tv quiz show that pitted one of our local top private schools up against a small enrollment rink-dink public school. The public school won!

I thought to myself, that this would make an interesting thread...but you beat me too it. I said to myslf, "Why do people want to send their kid(s) to private school, if they aren't getting a far superior education, when you consider the parents must not only pay for private school tuition, but public school taxes (which are the lions share of any counties county taxes!) as well? Oh...*I* know. It's to protect their little Johnnie or Susie from all the public school bullies and foul mouthed kids.

 

[pgwenthold]

CFLarson---You're right! I have proof. This Sunday, I was watching a tv quiz show that pitted one of our local top private schools up against a small enrollment rink-dink public school. The public school won!

If you were watching the same one I was, then I quit watching when the public school jumped out to a huge lead right off (something like 50 - 35, which is pretty big)

 

[Iamme]

Pgwenthold---Are you in Wisconsin? This was strictly a local tv show. Small schools...small tv show. But I was still intrigued by the unexpected result, as I was prejudiced into thinking that private schools attracted the best teachers, and that students get a far better education. I realize that one tv quiz show is not definitive proof, but still......

 

[a_unique_person]

Provide the link then, because I once read a study how people make things up and use fictional studies as their source for the fib.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12765746%5E12332,00.html

He found that students from non-selective government schools, most of whom were from poorer families, outperformed those from selective government schools and Catholic and independent schools.

Students from non-selective government schools entered university with generally lower scores but "subsequently catch up to, and then overtake, their more privileged counterparts".

I thought you trusted me more than that?

 

[Tmy]

I was prejudiced into thinking that private schools attracted the best teachers,

How??? By paying them less and giving them less benefits? It doesnt make sense.

I went to a catholic school. All the teachers had other jobs cause they got paid squat. Then there were the nuns. OI VEY!!! In 8th grade we had this senile nun who gave us the same assignments over and over. We never said anything cause we already had the work done.

 

[a_unique_person]

How??? By paying them less and giving them less benefits? It doesnt make sense.

I went to a catholic school. All the teachers had other jobs cause they got paid squat. Then there were the nuns. OI VEY!!! In 8th grade we had this senile nun who gave us the same assignments over and over. We never said anything cause we already had the work done.

I have noticed that the teachers at a private school often cannot afford to send their own children to it.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I have noticed that the teachers at a private school often cannot afford to send their own children to it.

A lot of private schools offer, as one of the benefits of working there, a discounted (or even free) education for the dependents.

Which in the case of one private school teacher of my acquaintance, is the justification for paying him a ridiculously low salary. It's still a good deal, though, as the scholarship offered is worth more than the difference between his salary and that of teachers elsewhere.

It just sucks that that kid, of course, hates like hell that his dad is one of the teachers at his school! Always awkward, socially.