I haven't read too many posts mentioning charter schools as a new framework for public education. Charters tend to be smaller and are far more flexible in their curriculum and facilities. I've attended several charter school conferences and have found their leaders and staff to be creative and enthusiastic about the the inner city, disadvantaged kids they're educating. Their success results from skilled teachers and high expectations. Kids don't need fancy facilities to learn, just hard work and adults who care. Young, talented teachers are drawn to charter schools, where they have a lot of input, are valued, and can really make a difference.

By the way, at least in California, property taxes fund only a small fraction of school costs. The vast majority are funded through the state via income taxes. With access to Title I Federal funding for low income students, poorer schools actually receive significantly more government money. But unfortunately, some is mismanaged and a lot is spent on security and maintaining facilities, disproportionate to suburban schools. And of course, there's the parent factor that helps raise money at suburban schools. If we want ALL kids to have a comprehensive education, access to athletics, the Arts, excellent science labs, etc., we need to pay more in taxes. Even if you send your child to private school, the majority of the doctors, lawyers, scientists, teachers, artists, musicians, government employees, store clerks, contractors, plumbers, etc. upon whom you depend, will be educated in public schools. We all better hope they're well educated.

I don't have kids, nor am I in any way affiliated with the school system, but I appreciated and was inspired by this article (and am also glad to see Amy Reiter is back!).

I grew up in a mid-sized town in Michigan where everyone went to public school. Any neighborhood kids who went to Catholic or private school (or, god forbid, BOARDING school) were considered weird by the rest of us.

How things change.

According to the article, Ms. Loh is 46. By my calculations, that puts her birth date at either 1962 or 1961.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomers

She is a Baby Boomer.

What up

Wikipedia aside (and I don't allow my students to use it for research purposes), generational demarcations are usually done by twenty year increments. 1940 and 1960 are frequently cited as bookends for Boomer births. None of this is set in stone, however, so depending on what chart you utilize, she could be either a tail-end Boomer or an early Gen Xer.

I live in Austin and most of the people I know send their kids to public school, but I grew up in Los Angeles in the 70's where no one did, if they could avoid it. But the problem was that my private school was terrible, I think I might have faired better in the public system. SO when it came time for me to send my daughter to school I just enrolled her in the public school around the corner volunteered in the classroom and donated money, all the things that are supposed to work. It is just that they didn't. My daughter was treated as an underachiever and given work that was so easy it was frustrating. All because she was completely overwhelmed with the number of people in the classroom and the teacher was hampered by the 20 children in her class where she really was unable to get to know her and her learning style. I left her in public school for three years with much advocacy on my part and therapy for my daughter.

The thing is that it didn't work. The public school ideal is great and everything, but I think that one of the problems with our generation is that sometimes we try to do the "normal" thing to the detriment of our children. Sometimes what works for other people doesn't work for our kid and we need to be able to rectify that. There are LOTS of children who don't fit well into the public school system and I think it is sad to see. I know too many kids who are medicated and in therapy so that they can stay in public school and be “normal.” I am fortunate that I can send my daughter to a private school, but for people without that option they have a real problem that can't be fixed with a donation from VH1. There is a core philosophy at the public school level that says that children all learn basically the same three ways at the same rate in a group of 20. Until the public schools can work beyond that I will stay far away from them.

Then we might as well all drink drain cleaner and be done with it.

i was recently surprised to see how much more rigorous the academic standards are for the local public schools versus the private schools i'm familiar with. the first grade kids are reading and writing at age 5 or 6. the seventh grade kids are doing algebra and writing up lab experiments. of course, this particular town is well known for having good public schools (even though it's mainly middle class, not a wealthy suburb); and the housing prices show it. for what a house costs here, you could buy a house in a more dysfunctional town, and send your kids to private school. the invisible hand of the free market, indeed.

i do suspect that that is partially a cause of the housing crunch. there are folks who would never dream they could send their kids to private school, but whose aspirations motivate them to at least move to a good school district. but that locks them into paying the difference; if they had taken the private route instead they could cut their expenses by pulling out of private school when the economy collapses around them.

Your letter is a poignant description of how hard it is to teach in certain schools. It also makes the case for parents who opt out of said schools.

I think it's pretty clear that schools vary all over this country, and they are unevenly funded. I'll point again to Jonathan Kozol (Savage Inequalities), who, to the question, "Do you think we can just solve the problem by throwing more money at it?" says "Hell, yeah."

There are so very many points made throughout this thread that resonate with my personal experience, and they are not all lined up "in favor of" or "against" public schools. It's a mixed bag.

Furthermore, goals matter. For example, is each LW looking to improve America? or looking for a good education for a particular child? Great if both goals can be accomplished at once. This is not always the case. Your own description of your own experience is as likely to send salon parents running to private schools as it is to make them feel sorry for you and want to do more in a general way to improve education in America.

As for my remaining a substitute, there are myriad financial and family reasons for my decision, none of which concern anyone here. But please don't shoot the messenger. My experience is real, and it's valuable information. I have mentioned ad nauseum that it's not necessarily representative, and in fact is not what I see at my own children's suburban public schools. (Back to the unfair funding issues.) But at almost every school I've been involved with, compliance is king. This is not so much a topic for public vs. private but for schooling in general. A topic for another day...