Comment Re:Surprise. (Score 1) 1038
I also think that private schools can do a great job of educating, but I think that in most cases their performance roughly parallels the public schools in their neighborhoods.
And I think many private schools have other means of cash in order to charge less in tuition than some public schools spend in tuition. For example, many are religious schools that use religious facilities. Also, teacher pay in private schools is usually about half that of public schools, at least in California, which mainly limits the available pool of teachers to those with spouses that have better-paying jobs. Head Royce, a well-known private school in Oakland, charges about $27,000 tuition per year in its high school, three times the figure you cite, probably almost four times the local rate, since California has among the poorest school funding in the nation. Every school is not Head Royce, but I mention it because such schools are often pointed out to illustrate the superiority of private solutions.
On the other hand, I don't discount your intuitions about government. The whole school board system is problematical, I feel. There should be some other way to provide local control without putting any old Tom Dick and Mary in charge of the schools. I also feel that one of the biggest barriers to progress in this country is a sort-of collusion between government and textbook publishers and test publishers, neither or whom has any interest in changing the system.
Witness what happened at the hands of politicians when real reform gained a toehold in California back during the eighties.
Most teachers I know and also the teacher's unions I've had contact with, are very heavily into reform based on research. It's the intractable resistance from the government, again, at the behest of entrenched publishers, that is the conservative force here.