Page 1 of 1
Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:26 pm
by Tom Flapwell
WASHINGTON -- Low-income students who attend urban public high schools generally do just as well on achievement tests as private-school students with similar backgrounds, according to a study being released Wednesday.
Students at independent private schools and most parochial schools scored the same on 12th-grade achievement tests in core academic subjects as those in traditional public high schools when income and other family characteristics were taken into account, according to the study by the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy.
While the finding is in line with some recent studies, it's at odds with a larger body of research that has found private-school students outperform those in public schools.
However, the new study not only compared students by income levels but also looked at a range of other family characteristics, such as whether a parent participates in school life.
"When these were taken into account, the private-school advantage went away," the report states.
As a graduate of public schools, I was rather pleased to read this. But then I realized that they're talking only about test scores, which have a spotty record as indicators of other success in life. The results could mean simply that public schools are teaching the tests.
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:55 pm
by Richard K Niner
The results could mean simply that public schools are teaching the tests.
As a means of determining future success, it's true that they're less than 25% predictive, but what other measures are there? And why would they teach these tests, are they tied to funding?
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:48 pm
by TravisFox
[quote="The Associated Press]
However, the new study not only compared students by income levels but also looked at a range of other family characteristics, such as whether a parent participates in school life.
[/quote]
Of course, the parents that send their kids to private/parochial schools do, in fact, tend to be more involved...
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:28 pm
by Richard K Niner
Of course, the parents that send their kids to private/parochial schools do, in fact, tend to be more involved...
...and there tends to be a larger proportion of them with higher SESs (something with a known correlation to performance)...
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:31 pm
by Tom Flapwell
And why would they teach these tests, are they tied to funding?
Remember the O&M series in which the principal favored tests?
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:57 pm
by Richard K Niner
And why would they teach these tests, are they tied to funding?
Remember the O&M series in which the principal favored tests?
Those ones were tied to funding...
These ones were probably only done at a smaller subset of schools, and those that tried to game it (probably a minority, since there wasn't any real incentive) would've been less represented due to being outliers.
Re: Study: No Benefit to Private Schools
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:11 am
by klimt
WASHINGTON -- Low-income students who attend urban public high schools generally do just as well on achievement tests as private-school students with similar backgrounds, according to a study being released Wednesday.
important bit in bold.