Only the bottom of the class students from a very good private school end up at RU. I hate to say it, but it's true. Look at the graduating classes of 2015 from the top Princeton area schools. It will shock you.
OT:Private Schools, Are they worth the cost?
- Thread starter rutgersdave
- Start date
Only the bottom of the class students from a very good private school end up at RU. I hate to say it, but it's true. Look at the graduating classes of 2015 from the top Princeton area schools. It will shock you.
I have never been to a Camden or Newark public school, but I can say with confidence, my public school district is better and so is every private school in my area.
You can keep making stuff up, but it doesn't make it true.
http://www.cbalincroftnj.org/uploaded/guidance/US_News_Report_class_of_2014.pdf
The bottom third of CBA's class of 2014 went to Rider/FDU/Rowan. 2 people went to Brookdale.
The middle third went to Rutgers/Penn State/Maryland
The top third went to elite universities
Using elite boarding schools that cater to the children of billionaires to prove your point is intellectually dishonest.
I wouldn't classify CBA as a "very good private school" as per my original post.
This conversation appears here multiple times a year and the usual players make the usual points. I'll add mine for the OP to consider.
1. If your decision is purely one of "where will little Suzy get into college" as the foundation of your "is it worth it" decision, you're largely missing the point.
2. Ignore posts that say Delbarton "isn't worth it" because a single kid ended up at Rowan and surely you could get into Rowan from your local public school.
3. One constant in this conversation is people who never stepped foot in a private school as student will tell you it isn't worth it. Do you take restaurant recommendations from people who haven't eaten where you want to go? Movies? Would you ask someone about a theater performance if they haven't gone to the play? It's bizarre to me that people will speak definitively about something they've never experienced first hand.
4. "Elite private schools" is being jumbled in this conversation. You won't find a more proud St. Peter's alum than myself. That said, it isn't an "elite" private school. I would put the experience up against any in the country, but it wouldn't meet the definition of "elite." St. Pauls in NH is "elite." Exeter is "elite." Pingry and and Delbarton are EXPENSIVE. There is a difference. If you need the difference explained to you, you need to back the conversation up and do more research.
Here is what is inarguable. If you feel your kid will thrive in an environment where the overwhelming majority of kids are high achievers, if you want more of a community atmosphere, smaller class sizes, usually superior athletics and teachers/instructors who are more engaged, than CONSIDER private school. If you know you're kid is a Top 20 performer, doesn't care much about sports, likes the idea of graduating with kids they never interacted with much and are comfortable that they (with your guidance) can more or less self navigate the HS experience, then save the money.
I don't recommend SPP because of the education--which is certainly NO WORSE than that at any public in the state. I recommend SPP because 24 years later, I could call anyone I graduated with and pick-up a conversation like it was 1991. There is a bond at these schools that is formed. There is a shared experience that is not able to be matched at a public school for obvious reasons. Doesn't make it better. It just makes it so. People here that I know, laugh at stuff like that. It's a waste of money to them. That's fine. However, the notion that you'll bank the $15k a year you would spend on CBA or SPP and hand it to your kid in a check when they graduate college is about as dumb a thing I've ever read here. No, you won't do that. And the idea that you should buy a house in a blue ribbon district and factor it's appreciation into your calculus of where to send your kid to HS, is NIRH at his finest. Which is all the indictment of a public school you need. Yes Suzy, I didn't send you to private school, but I did buy a house in Marlboro that you'll inherit in 45 years. You can thank me later. Maybe THAT is the dumbest thing I've ever read here.
I could get into other aspects of what differentiates the experience, but it will be met with the same sort of reply it always is.
The bottom line is quite simple. If you are basing your decision on things like ROI and college placement, you're making the decision for the wrong reason if you're kid is already a high achiever. This decision needs to be made for the secondary and tertiary reasons. You can play more sports at Delbarton or SPP than you can at Rutgers. SPP has a friggin water polo team now. You can study abroad in exchange programs. You can take Greek. You can take every AP course. You're required to perform community service. You can build houses in Appalachia or go and tutor kids in NOLA over Spring Break. Your spiritual development is part of the curriculum--and no, not bible thumping spiritual development. The college placement is quite good, but not as good as places like Pingry or Delbarton or Peddie. That is because of the socio-economic diversity--which sorta shoots NIRH's other absurd point to bits. He ate Dim Sum with all his Chinese friends in HS. lulz...some of my "best friends are black." Socio-economic diversity > ethnic diversity. So he ate Chicken vindaloo with his other upper middle class Indian friends...woooahhhhh...really gave him a head start in life.
1. If your decision is purely one of "where will little Suzy get into college" as the foundation of your "is it worth it" decision, you're largely missing the point.
2. Ignore posts that say Delbarton "isn't worth it" because a single kid ended up at Rowan and surely you could get into Rowan from your local public school.
3. One constant in this conversation is people who never stepped foot in a private school as student will tell you it isn't worth it. Do you take restaurant recommendations from people who haven't eaten where you want to go? Movies? Would you ask someone about a theater performance if they haven't gone to the play? It's bizarre to me that people will speak definitively about something they've never experienced first hand.
4. "Elite private schools" is being jumbled in this conversation. You won't find a more proud St. Peter's alum than myself. That said, it isn't an "elite" private school. I would put the experience up against any in the country, but it wouldn't meet the definition of "elite." St. Pauls in NH is "elite." Exeter is "elite." Pingry and and Delbarton are EXPENSIVE. There is a difference. If you need the difference explained to you, you need to back the conversation up and do more research.
Here is what is inarguable. If you feel your kid will thrive in an environment where the overwhelming majority of kids are high achievers, if you want more of a community atmosphere, smaller class sizes, usually superior athletics and teachers/instructors who are more engaged, than CONSIDER private school. If you know you're kid is a Top 20 performer, doesn't care much about sports, likes the idea of graduating with kids they never interacted with much and are comfortable that they (with your guidance) can more or less self navigate the HS experience, then save the money.
I don't recommend SPP because of the education--which is certainly NO WORSE than that at any public in the state. I recommend SPP because 24 years later, I could call anyone I graduated with and pick-up a conversation like it was 1991. There is a bond at these schools that is formed. There is a shared experience that is not able to be matched at a public school for obvious reasons. Doesn't make it better. It just makes it so. People here that I know, laugh at stuff like that. It's a waste of money to them. That's fine. However, the notion that you'll bank the $15k a year you would spend on CBA or SPP and hand it to your kid in a check when they graduate college is about as dumb a thing I've ever read here. No, you won't do that. And the idea that you should buy a house in a blue ribbon district and factor it's appreciation into your calculus of where to send your kid to HS, is NIRH at his finest. Which is all the indictment of a public school you need. Yes Suzy, I didn't send you to private school, but I did buy a house in Marlboro that you'll inherit in 45 years. You can thank me later. Maybe THAT is the dumbest thing I've ever read here.
I could get into other aspects of what differentiates the experience, but it will be met with the same sort of reply it always is.
The bottom line is quite simple. If you are basing your decision on things like ROI and college placement, you're making the decision for the wrong reason if you're kid is already a high achiever. This decision needs to be made for the secondary and tertiary reasons. You can play more sports at Delbarton or SPP than you can at Rutgers. SPP has a friggin water polo team now. You can study abroad in exchange programs. You can take Greek. You can take every AP course. You're required to perform community service. You can build houses in Appalachia or go and tutor kids in NOLA over Spring Break. Your spiritual development is part of the curriculum--and no, not bible thumping spiritual development. The college placement is quite good, but not as good as places like Pingry or Delbarton or Peddie. That is because of the socio-economic diversity--which sorta shoots NIRH's other absurd point to bits. He ate Dim Sum with all his Chinese friends in HS. lulz...some of my "best friends are black." Socio-economic diversity > ethnic diversity. So he ate Chicken vindaloo with his other upper middle class Indian friends...woooahhhhh...really gave him a head start in life.
Last edited:
For us it was as much about private school reinforcing the values taught at home. The FRHS district has a great reputation, but those who live in Western Monmouth know firsthand that there's a considerable element of douchebaggery that lives in these parts. The public high schools, for whatever their academic qualifications, do nothing to teach kids not to be assholes.
The local high schools are drug dens, SJV has a zero-tolerance policy. Same goes for anti-social behavior. All in all, it was a better atmosphere, one that enables kids to thrive. It was well worth the money.
The local high schools are drug dens, SJV has a zero-tolerance policy. Same goes for anti-social behavior. All in all, it was a better atmosphere, one that enables kids to thrive. It was well worth the money.
I can't speak for all private high schools. With respect to the one we sent our kids to, absolutely. Much less. As I said, they have a zero tolerance policy for pretty much everything.
Public schools can't just dismiss a student who is a discipline problem. Private schools can - and SJV makes that crystal clear at all times. That they will bounce kids for bad behavior isn't a threat, or hyperbole - you can see it firsthand.
My catholic HS had drug testing. Sure it was voluntary but who isn't going to sign up when mom and dad are sitting next to you during freshman orientation?
Reading posters' comments about how superior their beloved private schools are to solid publics kind of reminds me of delusional Syracuse fans flapping their gums about how much better their football program is than Rutgers.
De-nial ain't just a river in Egypt as a great man once told me.
De-nial ain't just a river in Egypt as a great man once told me.
biggest difference between Private school and public school - from my experience - is the peer group your child will be with. In public school there is what I refer to the general prison population - kids that don't want to be in school.
Just put your kids in the very best school you can afford that's the best match for them.
Even if you skimp and scrape day and night to send your kid to private school, your kid will know they are different from the general population who are wearing the trendiest clothes and driving new cars. Some kids wouldn't be fazed by such an environment. A lot of kids would. They are kids. Factor that in.
Conversely, if you can afford to go private but are contemplating the local blue-ribbon whose top 10 go to Harvard & Yale, consider class size. If your kid is an "A" student, they will probably succeed either way. Now if your kid is a borderline B student, they might greatly benefit from the increased attention that only the smaller private schools can offer.
No matter what, know that your own involvement matters infinitely more than school choice.
Good luck.
Even if you skimp and scrape day and night to send your kid to private school, your kid will know they are different from the general population who are wearing the trendiest clothes and driving new cars. Some kids wouldn't be fazed by such an environment. A lot of kids would. They are kids. Factor that in.
Conversely, if you can afford to go private but are contemplating the local blue-ribbon whose top 10 go to Harvard & Yale, consider class size. If your kid is an "A" student, they will probably succeed either way. Now if your kid is a borderline B student, they might greatly benefit from the increased attention that only the smaller private schools can offer.
No matter what, know that your own involvement matters infinitely more than school choice.
Good luck.
I'm sorry such a simple point went right over your head.
I'm also still waiting for you to list the players that were academic casualties during the Schiano era. Where you state players who were playing, suddenly went into Schiano's dog house and later transferred to mask academic risks.
http://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/barnwell-academically-ineligible.11790/
If it was a "simple point", then it was also a stupid one.
And frankly, you get nothing from me. You're kind of a dick. Do your own work.
Reading the thread, it seems to me the anti private school people are yelling the loudest. The pro private group is offering reasons and insight......you just excuses.
When I was teaching public school in NJ (which now seems like a whole life ago), many of my colleagues considered leaving public school to teach in private school. There would be more resources, better facilities, smaller classes, a better overall commitment from the students/parents, etc. No one left, because no one wanted to take the pay cut.
Here's a link (click me) with some data, even though it's a little old (2007-08), that shows the average private school teacher made 27% less than the average public school teacher that year. I've seen some more recent estimates where that number is over 30%. On average, teachers with 15 years experience in a private school were making roughly the same as 1st year teachers in a public school. There were also much wider pay gaps for women and black/hispanic teachers (e.g. black private school teachers made 17% less than white private school teachers and 38% less than black public school teachers). There also isn't any tenure protection (which isn't something I ever really cared about, but it's an important factor for many), and the health plans are often not as good.
I ultimately left the teaching profession in large part because of pay (and that there was no way to increase your compensation through performance). I get paid a lot more now as a consultant for fewer overall hours (when counting time spent outside of school hours) and less stress.
Last edited:
Which proves the point that people who are teaching in the schools we are talking about are doing so because they have a desire to be around kids who are high achievers. They aren't punching a clock and collecting a pay check.
I don't know what the % is now, but SPP's faculty used to hover at just over 65% with a masters--in their discipline, not simply in "education." There are also more than a dozen alums on the faculty at any given point in time.
And Shill, I never said "better." I said it's different. And those that make wild economic claims--like handing their kids checks of saved tuition or cite the appreciation of the family home--as reasons for not sending them, would never send them in the first place. So why convince someone who is dead set against the idea?
I think it's the height of ignorance to advise someone against that which you've never experienced.
I wouldn't tell you NOT to eat the BBQ in Austin, as I've never personally eaten the BBQ in Austin. Same point...
Thank you for confirming you were full of baloney last week. And if you think I'm a dick you should look in the mirror. You act like a frat boy constantly on here and you are a middle aged guy.
Not something I can speak to, as I only ever worked with public school teachers. I worked with some truly exceptional individuals across three different public school districts - both exceptionally good, and exceptionally bad - and a range in between.
***
To hudson's point about not just punching a clock and collecting a paycheck - that's a bit misleading.
Yes, there are some tenured teachers who do exactly that - they are paid on a scale that only goes up with longevity, not performance... which puts the incentive on endurance, not the quality of their work. It's my opinion, though, that these individuals would be the same ones I see in a corporate world skating by, too - only in corporate, their salary would stagnate fairly rapidly, while in the education system it goes up incrementally every year.
BUT, most teachers aren't in it just to collect a paycheck. There are better ways to collect a paycheck (and likely a larger one). These are college educated individuals with strengths in presentation, analytics, problem solving, root cause analysis, team building, etc - who also have training in a specific field that is valued outside the classroom (math, science, writing). That skill set translates pretty well to the world of corporate training, consulting, project management, motivation, change management, lean/six sigma, etc. The Project Management Institute even allows years in a classroom as part of the requirement for hours of project-based work when pursuing a PMP certification.
To choose to teach (and more importantly, to choose to *remain* teaching), takes a commitment beyond just cashing a paycheck - whether that's in a private or public school. Private school teachers have some benefits that public school teachers do not (generally teaching a higher quality, more affluent student, with more involved parents - at least insomuch as they care about the education of their children - and doing it with better facilities/equipment/etc)... and many public school teachers would look to that world as the grass being greener on the other side of the fence (how easy it must be to teach those types of kids with those types of parents, etc). Public school teachers have more challenging students, but many of them embrace that and wear it as a badge of honor - they're elevating those students whose parents don't have as much money or care as much about education, etc.
My own frustration was that I had a high performance level and was getting paid less than the guy in the classroom next to me who *was* one of the guys phoning it in... and there was absolutely nothing I could do about it. Compensation in no way reflected success, responsibility, or workload - it only reflected "years served".
***
I do want to echo a point made by someone earlier, though. Public schools concentrate a LOT of time and money on the top 10%, the bottom 10%, and special education (another 15-20%) - on top of the inordinate amount of non-instructional time spent on standardized testing and test preparation. Kids who fall outside of those ranges often get less attention - not necessarily because the teachers don't focus on them, but because of the way the district handles staffing/scheduling. This is more apparent in high school than lower grades - AP and honors classes are generally smaller class sizes and have teachers who focus on that level of student achievement. Remedial classes are also smaller and have teachers who focus on that level of achievement. Special education has its own staffing needs for study skills teachers, in class support teachers, self-contained classroom teachers, etc - and again, fewer students per teacher. With a limited budget that voters are often loathe to increase, a lot of the "teacher salary" bucket goes to those groups - leaving the rest of the students with larger class sizes and fewer options - which also means it's harder for teachers to focus on 1 of 30 kids instead of 1 of 15.
I'd imagine that private schools handle this differently, but I can't speak to how. It's likely due in large part to the different makeup of the student body, and the ability to more easily manage class sizes.
My point was not that public school teachers punch a clock and/or collect a pay check. Some do, some don't. My point was this notion that private school teachers attract less qualified or less competent teachers because the money is not as good. That is bunk.
in hind sight - if I had to do it over again - I would have insisted that my oldest daughter go to private school.
The alumni network for private schools in monmouth county is amazing - there is a brotherhood of attorneys in monmouth county that are CBA grads - that support each other and give back to their school.
The alumni network for private schools in monmouth county is amazing - there is a brotherhood of attorneys in monmouth county that are CBA grads - that support each other and give back to their school.
Not having any experience with private school teachers, I can't say whether they are more or less qualified or competent. More advanced degrees? Sure. That doesn't necessarily equate to a being a better (or worse) teacher, though.
One can infer a few things about private school teachers, though. They are making less money, but had the same (or higher, given more advanced degrees and possibly higher rate of attending private colleges) expense for their own education. So, they either benefited more frequently from college scholarships, benefited more frequently from more affluent parents who could lessen the need for student loans, benefit more frequently from a spouse who makes enough money to make up for the pay gap, or are just in greater debt. None of that speaks to their qualities as a teacher, though.
I can only speak to my own experience. There were some exceptionally good teachers in the public schools I worked in that considered leaving to teach in private school, but decided against it because they couldn't take the pay cut. There were some bad teachers who longed for the "good life" of teaching private school who probably wouldn't have still been teaching in public school if not for tenure, and I'd hope wouldn't be able to maintain a job at a private school without it.
There are certainly benefits to private school (at all levels). There are also associated costs.
Also, as has been mentioned, not all private schools are created equal (nor are all public schools). One public school might have exceptional teachers, while another does not... and the same goes for private school. Do your research, look at your finances, and see what your best options are.
Some very good points. Do your homework as I mentioned above in this thread to determine if the private school you are considering is successful at holding on to teachers or if it is a feeder to the area public schools.
From a level of education standpoint and getting into college - outside of going to Lawrenceville and that level of private school, one can't really distinguish between a high performing public school than a private. Princeton HS, West Windsor-Plainsboro, Montgomery, Livingston, etc., have more than their fair share of kids going to the Ivies, other brand name colleges, and academies. What going to those types of publics doesn't buy you is that alumni network that seems to be the norm for the private schools.
I went to WWPHS back in the day...and for the most part, the top 25% of kids went to very prestigious schools (lots of Ivies, Georgetown, Northwestern, MIT, Duke, etc.), the next 25% went to schools like Maryland, Syracuse, Penn State, and Rutgers. The 3rd quartile was the Delawares, the second tier privates, and the bottom 25% were split between the Monmouth types, community colleges, and trade schools. Something like 5% of kids didn't go to any college or post-HS education, which translated to about 20 kids or so. So, if getting into college is the primary concern, public can work out just as well as private. To echo the others in the thread, it's more of a preferential choice in terms of environment, amount of individual attention your kid needs, etc.
I went to WWPHS back in the day...and for the most part, the top 25% of kids went to very prestigious schools (lots of Ivies, Georgetown, Northwestern, MIT, Duke, etc.), the next 25% went to schools like Maryland, Syracuse, Penn State, and Rutgers. The 3rd quartile was the Delawares, the second tier privates, and the bottom 25% were split between the Monmouth types, community colleges, and trade schools. Something like 5% of kids didn't go to any college or post-HS education, which translated to about 20 kids or so. So, if getting into college is the primary concern, public can work out just as well as private. To echo the others in the thread, it's more of a preferential choice in terms of environment, amount of individual attention your kid needs, etc.
Boy, times sure have changed. We used to drive an hour just for Peddie School dope. All bud & it would last for a month.
This is not always true. Holmdel HS and Colts Neck HS consistently rank in the top 10-15 schools in the State and are ranked above many private/Catholic schools. There are also some private schools that don't make the top 50.
Could you please point me to the list where you saw Parochial schools rated in the same list as the publics? I have never seen a list with parochials rated like they do for the publics on the state website.
RUHudson has it right to me
I went to a Jesuit high school in Boston I got a great education But more importantly I learned how to study, how to prioritize what was important, and met friends who shared the same values and stood by me for life My time in high school for me was much more valuable than college or law school Part of this may have been that I knew it was a great strain on my parents to come up with the tuition and didn't want to let them down
My kids went to a very good public high school in an affluent town and got a fine education and went to a first rate university. The biggest draw back I saw was that there was a strange ethos among the students that it was ok to get good grades only as long as they seemed to come easily.It was not cool to study hard In fact, there was considerable peer pressure not to be seen as studious This would not happen at catholic school or I believe most private schools And as some posters have stated the impact is probably heaviest on kids in the middle of the pack that might have to hit the books to get good grades
Finally, occasionally there are posts on this board that seem to exhibit an anti catholic bias which I find amazing in New Jersey. Thinks may have changed somewhat but I don't think there is an air of entitlement at catholic high schools. I think at most schools the parents are concerned with their kids education and want the best for them At the elite private boarding schools it may well be different among some of the student body but not at parochial schools, which historically have tried to knock any sense of prejudice or entitlement out of there students
I went to a Jesuit high school in Boston I got a great education But more importantly I learned how to study, how to prioritize what was important, and met friends who shared the same values and stood by me for life My time in high school for me was much more valuable than college or law school Part of this may have been that I knew it was a great strain on my parents to come up with the tuition and didn't want to let them down
My kids went to a very good public high school in an affluent town and got a fine education and went to a first rate university. The biggest draw back I saw was that there was a strange ethos among the students that it was ok to get good grades only as long as they seemed to come easily.It was not cool to study hard In fact, there was considerable peer pressure not to be seen as studious This would not happen at catholic school or I believe most private schools And as some posters have stated the impact is probably heaviest on kids in the middle of the pack that might have to hit the books to get good grades
Finally, occasionally there are posts on this board that seem to exhibit an anti catholic bias which I find amazing in New Jersey. Thinks may have changed somewhat but I don't think there is an air of entitlement at catholic high schools. I think at most schools the parents are concerned with their kids education and want the best for them At the elite private boarding schools it may well be different among some of the student body but not at parochial schools, which historically have tried to knock any sense of prejudice or entitlement out of there students
How are you defining benefits? College placement? Network? day to day experience? Cost/benefit?
If I recall, you mentioned sending your kids to Yellow Duck? Why? so they could read by 3 years old? I send mine to Goddard, for a 1/3rd of the price, and he can read at 4. Does it matter when either learned to read? Of course not. You saw other intangible benefits to sending your kids to one of the most expensive pre-schools in the state. I don't question that choice or imply you are an idiot for making it, when a perfectly reasonable far less expensive alternative existed a half a mile away.
