Public vs Private Schools

Amber - posted on 06/17/2011 ( 2 moms have responded )




The other thread about food in schools got me thinking.

I've heard many people throw around the idea of privatizing schools and taking them out of government control where funding is concerned. At first, I thought it was a horrible I'm not so sure.

I look at the differences in private preschool and it makes me wonder. We have multiple options for preschool in our area. The school systems offer preschool, but they aren't of the highest quality.
We pay for a private preschool. Parents take turns providing unopened snacks that must be healthy (our turn comes once every 2 months or so) instead of the preschool providing it.

Our son also gets swimming lessons monthly, gym class every day for 30 minutes, tumbling classes once a month, has field trips, and the school has much more money for supplies and necessities than its public counterparts.

I know many private schools are expensive, but due to multiple schools in our area the prices are dramatically less than they are in other places. The more options parents have, the better the quality will be and the lower the price will fall.

The tax money currently collected to pay for schools could be returned to the parents for use in schools. People who cannot afford it, should still be able to get it paid for by the government. This gives the parents the power to choose the best overall education for their child.

I understand that their would be some discrepancies in quality, but there already are. Private schools are expensive now because they have a premium status. Once they are no longer considered a luxury good, the luxury price tag should disappear.

I know this is sounds too good to be true. What am I missing?


View replies by

Teresa - posted on 06/17/2011




The government would NEVER go for it and it would bankrupt the public schools. I am not sure how it works everywhere but here in Illinois, everyone pays real estate taxes and the bulk of those go to the public schools. I could see landowners pulling their kids from the public schools and reinvesting that money in private schools, leaving the public schools with nothing. The parents who are involved the publics schools are the ones with a vested interest. The problem with our area is that the landowners bear the burden while renters/non landowners send their kids for free and there are a lot more non-landowners than landowners. See the problem? The school would have no funding.

I agree parental involvement in the key. I took my son out of public school last school year and we paid for private and the difference was night and day. I DO NOT think it is fair that we have to pay taxes to the public school AND have to pay for private school to get our son a decent education.

[deleted account]

The difference in quality does not come from public v/s private status, it comes from parental involvement. If you have parents who are involved in the school, volunteer, work with their kids at home, etc. you will have a better quality of educations whether you choose to send your child to a public school or a private one.

My son's school is fabulous, He goes to public school, but it is one of the best in the state. Why? Because the parents make it that way. The schools in my mom's area are horrid. Even though more than 50% of the students come from households where one parent is not working outside the home, less than 5% of them volunteer. The students rarely have homework done, and the AP reading program was almost lost last year due to lack of volunteers--our school sent parents over there, so we were pulling double duty.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms