"Why Public School Students Outperform Their Private School Peers"

[applegrove]

Why Public School Students Outperform Their Private School Peers


by Jeffry Aaron Snyder at the Boston Review, Business Insider

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-public-schools-outperform-private-schools-2013-12

"SNIP.....................................


Private school students do, in fact, score better on tests, but the authors wanted to figure out if this advantage is a genuine marker of superior education in private schools or simply an artifact of the more privileged backgrounds of the students who attend them. To answer this question, the Lubienskis decided to analyze math achievement scores. Math, they explain, is an especially good indicator of school effectiveness because it is a subject “learned primarily in school, as compared with other subjects, such as reading, which tend to be more heavily influenced by students’ experiences at home.”

The authors examined two main datasets — a longitudinal study of more than 20,000 students who started kindergarten in the fall of 1998; and the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress, which surveyed more than 300,000 fourth and eighth graders. (Known as the “nation’s report card,” the NAEP is widely regarded as the gold standard in student-achievement research.)

Using sophisticated analytical tools with names that only a statistician could love — hierarchical linear modeling, multivariate regression — the authors conclude that the private-school effect is a myth.

After accounting for the demographic differences among different school sector populations, traditional public school students performed just as well in math as did their private school peers. In grade four, public school students actually outpaced their demographically similar peers in private schools.



...................................SNIP"

[SheilaT]

1. Interesting.

There are private schools and then there are private schools. My sons went to an academically rigorous private school. They and their classmates way outperformed the students at the (very good) local public schools. Or at least if things like National Merit Scholarships mean anything.

And in the public schools, local demographics matter a lot. The good public schools were in a fairly affluent area, which matters a lot. Across that district, especially in the elementary schools, neighborhoods varied quite a bit. Even the several high schools served somewhat different demographics, and which one was the top one academically was not at all a secret.

[elleng]

3. Yes, demographics matter a lot, SheilaT.

[elleng]

2. ?'an artifact of the more privileged backgrounds?'

?After accounting for the demographic differences among different school sector populations?

[BlueStreak]

5. Yes. There are very few studies that show any benefit from charters

when you equalize for the demographics, class size, and money spent per student. In fact studies seem to suggest the opposite. And this latest report talks about a big reason for that. In my area, only 50% of the charter faculty has to have a teaching certificate, whereas practically every public school teacher has a masters by the time they are 6 or 7 years into their career.

The charters in my area have almost nothing in the performing arts -- other than you basic finger painting.

The whole charter thing is a huge scam. It is just the latest way for politicians (both Dems and Republicans) to extract huge amounts of public money and give it to their friends who run these charter schools that are essentially outside of any real accountability processes.

[elleng]

4. What business is it of the government to fund high-quality preschool and child care?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11247664