« Reader request for recent jazz CDs | Main | Should Harvard continue to accumulate an endowment? »
Public vs. private schools
No, this is not a policy question. Rather Jenny, a loyal MR reader, asks for advice:
As an economist, I was wondering if you could provide any insights to us parents evaluating public versus private elementary schools for our kids...By comparison [with the good private school], my public school education seems shoddy. But at $21,000 for kindergarten and a younger sister that would be joining him, this is a huge financial commitment, and takes away our flexibility to do anything but grind away for the next 15 years. My son is bright and curious - how do I know that he will get that much of an incremental improvement being in private school? And despite my very non-inspiring, and at times dreadful, public education, I can't say that I'm any worse off for it today...I've been really struggling with how to evaluate this. Can economics shed any light?
I faced this same choice myself as a kid and I ended up telling my mother I was happy to remain in the public school. If nothing else I feared the commuting costs and not having friends' homes be nearby. Furthermore at public school I met Randall Kroszner and Daniel Klein, among other notables. Natasha and I faced this choice again with Yana and she ended up in public high school. I can't really cite economics here but if your public school is halfway decent that is the side I come down on.
Readers?
Posted by Tyler Cowen on June 5, 2008 at 03:45 AM in Education | Permalink
Comments
I would guess that an extra $10,000 (time cost) of parental involvement would wipe out any difference. I'm sure you're going to be involved anyway, but surely you will have some extra time if you don't shoulder that financial burden. Put half of that into your kids, and it's really hard for me to believe that they won't be better off than they would have been in private school.
Personal experience - I went to public school for 1-7, but my mom gave me extra "home homework", encouraged me to read books, etc. I went to a private high school, and my brother went to public school. At least in my experience (though I did go to private school in India), public schools are better at letting you take advanced/college classes than private ones (mine had IB, but that was the limit).
Posted by: Omkar at Jun 5, 2008 3:53:14 AM
My view on it: go for criteria. A high school stundent will not learn as much as he is lectured, he will learn as much as he is asked to.
So in my point of view criteria is crucial, money for education should never be an issue.
Whichever has better criteria public or private, that should be your choose.
There are many public schools where lecturing is very good but students are not asked to know much so they end up knowing little.
Posted by: Tomislav Najdovski at Jun 5, 2008 4:32:16 AM
Tim Harford covered this question recently in 'More or Less' (a BBC Radio 4 programme). You can listen (I don't know if it's blocked outside the UK) to the programme here.
This is the description:
Can numbers tell you whether it matters what sort of school your child goes to?News reports have claimed that middle-class children suffer no academic disadvantage if they attend a struggling state school. But is that really true?
Actually, it is a very difficult question to answer.
One factor to consider is who your children go to school with. How important is that?
Or is it the quality of teaching that really counts?
Researchers in the United States have studied 120,000 children, who were randomly assigned classmates over a period of a decade.
Tim Harford finds out the results of the study from one of the world's leading experts on the statistics of peer effects, Professor Caroline Hoxby of Stanford University.
Posted by: Anon at Jun 5, 2008 4:43:09 AM
I agree with the post and the comments. The extra financial flexibility can be put to good use for example spending a bit more time with the kids and taking the kids travelling learning a lot more about for example history, culture and languages than I think they could ever learn in a private school classroom. And there are lots more great benefits of international travel. I do not have any direct or indirect experience with private education though.
Posted by: Morten at Jun 5, 2008 4:54:33 AM
Anecdotal evidence - a family friend's daughter was in a public school. The school called her up and said "Your daughter has a reading problem." Mum went "oh my god!" and hauled the kid out of school and off to a private school. Two years later the private school called her up and said "Your daughter has a reading problem."
Research on the educational achievement of private vs public schools does not on the whole provide evidence that private schools are better in developed countries once you control for the socio-economic conditions of the kids going there. http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/05/0411school.html. $20,000 is an awful lot to spend without much evidence of superior results.
The ability to get a kid out of a situation where they are being bullied strikes me as the big advantage of being able to go private. On the other hand, the kid is probably about equally as likely to be bullied in a private school as a public one.
I'd say go for private schooling and after-school if necessary. http://kitchentablemath.blogspot.com/ is a useful resource for after-schooling issues.
Posted by: Tracy W at Jun 5, 2008 5:06:03 AM
The loyal MR reader is asking about ELEMENTARY school, not high school. Also this question is highly detail and context dependent.
At the level of elementary school, I'd be suspicious how big the differences are (unless its an urban district and they're actually quite bad). The good private schools I'm aware of in the peninsula of Silicon Valley start at grade 6.
Beyond that, even though I'm a product of public school, I'd say go with the best you can afford. You can get a good education at a good public school, but you have to go out and get it. A good private school will somewhat force you to get a good education.
Posted by: Matthew Gunn at Jun 5, 2008 5:17:45 AM
Schools -- both public and private -- are pretty abusive environments, and you have no control over the types of kids your kid will be associating with there. Since peers have such a huge influence, that's pretty scary.
Homeschool.
Posted by: Jacqueline at Jun 5, 2008 5:23:54 AM
Just a general point, I'd be cautious about comparing like anecdote to like anecdote. California used to have some of the best public schools in the nation, now, using data from national standardized tests, they are near the worst. Today, EVEN among kids of college educated parents, average scores from Massachusetts public school kids (the best state) completely blow away the scores of kids from California public schools. My point is that the comparison of public vs. private school has vastly different meaning depending on when and where the comparison is/was made.
Posted by: mgunn at Jun 5, 2008 5:30:10 AM
The main difference in the UK seems to be class sizes and teacher workload... public (state) schools often have class sizes up to double that of private run schools. And the number of classes each teacher runs can be up to double. That has to make a difference to the education the pupils receive.
Posted by: Robert G at Jun 5, 2008 5:48:23 AM
I went to a private, religious school from K-12. I would say that while the education was better compared to my public alternatives (in upstate SC), the biggest advantages it conferred on me were those related to personal character.
Nonetheless, my school made it very difficult for me to apply to college because I didn’t have access to all those lovely standardized measures of worth (AP, IB, Honor Clubs) that public schools possess.
In short, I’d say go for public education. The advantages missed by choosing public education can usually be compensated for, but the advantages missed by choosing private education often cannot.
Posted by: Jeff H. at Jun 5, 2008 5:49:01 AM
As a bit of a counter to the # of AP classes at public schools, I went to a good public school, but they didn't have the calculus version of AP physics (BC), just the non-calc version (AB).
So near test time, I got excused to go to a local private school for a bit to sit in on the pre-test class-review and practice test.
On the flip side, a friend of mine at that same private school wanted to take the year long version of AP calc (BC), but it wasn't offered by his school. He didn't sit in on a class at my school (I don't know if he didn't ask, if he didn't want to, or if the school didn't allow him to), but we did exchange notes and prep together.
Short version: I don't think it can be generalized that public schools have more AP classes than private schools.
Posted by: Jody at Jun 5, 2008 6:44:43 AM
For that amount of money, wouldn't it be better to move to a better school district?
Posted by: Hei Lun Chan at Jun 5, 2008 7:20:46 AM
We moved 4 times while my daughter was in elementary school and chose private schooling 3 times. While academics were important to us, ultimately, I think that the decision was a social one for us. We liked the families that attended the schools, and the private schools made socializing easier in a new community. Academics standards are always a crap shoot, but I must admit that the private schools were able to fire incompetent teachers. It might be that private schools tend to provide a better safety net.
Posted by: Jim at Jun 5, 2008 7:23:20 AM
At $21000/year cost of private school, one also should consider the possibility of home schooling (with one parent staying at home). Even this is a huge financial commitment, though.
Posted by: Mikko at Jun 5, 2008 7:31:51 AM
I'd recommend Montessori school (www.montessori.edu) for elementary school-- forget whether it's public or private, it is how your kids are taught. Unlike traditional US education, Montessori education helps develop a well-rounded, self-directed child. I have been impressed with the maturity of children I've seen there.
I'm not a shill for the Montessori system, just a late 20-something hoping to save enough money to send my kids to a good school, and regretting the fact that we don't have a school voucher system.
Posted by: at Jun 5, 2008 7:39:19 AM
Jim hits the nail on the head with his comment about private schools being able to fire incompetent teachers. My children are in an affordable (60% of our public school cost per student) religious elementary school. While the school isn't always able to hire better teachers than the local public schools, bad teachers are fired quickly. Unfortunately, more expensive private schools often hire away some of the better teachers. While I don't think the academics are necessarily any better than the local public schools, the environment is more supportive and accepting of differences.
Posted by: subrosa at Jun 5, 2008 7:45:52 AM
I have to agree that the question is highly context-dependent. Many public school systems, even in suburban areas, are deeply flawed. Still, the best public school systems are better than many private schools.
If this is an issue of real concern, then I would STRONGLY recommend home schooling. The socialization of schooling--segregation by age, cliques, status hierarchies--is positively toxic. If you want to avoid some truly pernicious tendencies, school at home and enter the kid into many extracurricular activities, chosen with care.
Posted by: mp at Jun 5, 2008 7:48:56 AM
I agree with the first commenter -- parental involvement probably matters more. I went to private school K-12, but I learned more from my parents, and later from independent reading, than I ever did in the classroom.
On the other hand, it depends very much on the kid. If he has a learning disability, or is likely to be bullied, public school might just be too much misery. It depends on the private school, of course, but I'd guess that a kid is less likely to be shoved in a trashcan for being too bright or too different.
Posted by: sc at Jun 5, 2008 7:51:15 AM
I agree with many of the comments here: increase "investment" in the amount of time spent as a parent on academic assistance and guidance rather than investing in a private school financially.
Are there studies that look at school performance relative to parental assistance in academic/studying activities in the home? I imagine there are schools that do all of the "right things" but under-perform because of a lack of parental interest/involvement in their child's academic life.
Posted by: Vin at Jun 5, 2008 7:51:20 AM
$21,000/yr? I'd have to be pretty rich to think I could get value for that kind of money from kindergarten. And, as they say at the Yacht store, if you have to ask...
Posted by: Andrew at Jun 5, 2008 8:09:57 AM
Costs may be nearly prohibitive, and thus not worth it, but I am strongly (character-wise, but also intellectually) the product of many years of Montessori and Quaker private education, and I do think that the best incarnations of both of those approaches are fairly special. There may be financial aid available, you might be surprised--and the other thing I strongly believe is that actually elementary school is the place to sink the cash if you are only going to go private for part of the child's education. There tend to be magnet-type options for public middle and high school, but the kind of stuff (including, especially, dedicated and experienced teachers with extraordinary resources from the school) the best private elementary schools can do for kids is really something. Private for K-5 or 6 and then moving into the best part of the public school system is often a good compromise.
Posted by: Jenny at Jun 5, 2008 8:12:02 AM
My personal experience: mom offered me the choice to attend a private school as I entered high school; I didn't like the implicit elitism, and attended my local public high school instead.
On the first day of high school, I was offered the opportunity to buy marijuana and magic mushrooms in the bathroom. This was not an anomaly.
The following year we moved to Virginia, where I attended another public school. The highlight of that year was getting to see one of the bullies get his due when he was forcibly held down and urinated upon by a rival feral pack.
The year after that we moved overseas, and I attended a very fine private school (100% of my graduating class went on to college; straight 5s on the AP exams; that sort of thing). It was the best experience of my life. To this day, over twenty years later, I cherish that experience above all others in my life.
Just my personal experience. Your mileage may vary.
Posted by: Rich at Jun 5, 2008 8:13:17 AM
Btw, Tyler is right that it's not a policy question. I'm a huge advocate of separation of school and state. But it's not the parents', teachers' or kids' fault that the state subsidizes possibly inferior schools to the point that the personal finance decision is often a no-brainer.
Posted by: Andrew at Jun 5, 2008 8:15:54 AM
Just another anecdote, but here goes anyhow. My son went to a private elementary school. The main difference between it and the public school he would have gone to wasn't academic in the narrow sense, it had to do with things like art, music, and sports, which his school did much better (and, in the case of sports, much more democratically--everyone was on a team) than the public schools. On the down side, he was on the bus an hour every day. When he's in town, he still stops by the school to see his old teachers; I doubt that he'd be doing that if he'd gone to a public school.
Posted by: Alan Gunn at Jun 5, 2008 8:19:51 AM
Homeschooling or unschooling are the massively superior "none of the above" option here. Also, consider one of these schools as an intermediate between homeschooling and private school
http://www.sudval.org/07_othe_01.html
Finally, a few states do have a few public schools that are actually good. If you can get your kid into one, that might be best. Florida has several for elementary school kids and up, New York has three for high school, etc.
Posted by: michael vassar at Jun 5, 2008 8:30:40 AM
