Off topic, kinda funny

[Norm Peterson]

OK, so y'know how MSN has lists of top this or bottom that?  (OK, maybe you don't know, but trust me, they do.)

 

Anyway, today they had the list of the very best high schools in every state.  (Congratulations Elkhorn High -- you're the best HS in Nebraska, according to MSN.)

 

Well, best high school in every state ... except one.

 

For Alabama, they just listed not applicable. 

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/the-best-high-school-in-each-state/ss-BBjnvWw?ocid=DELLDHP#image=2

[big red22]

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

[49r]

South Dakota has a N/A too.

 

I had the same thoughts as big red22 as well.  I thought Omaha Central was tops in Nebraska...

[Handy Johnson]

I once graded standardized reading tests for Alabama 4th graders. The students were asked to read a paragraph, then answer  4 -5 questions. They were graded on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being the highest. If you marked on the paper, as in scribbled on it, you got a 1. The Alabama state average was, wait for it........ a TWO

[AuroranHusker]

And, you guys really think MSN is any sort of "good" judge of this... in my best Cris Carter voice: c'mon man!

[Dean Smith]

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

[Huskerpapa]

I am kind of surprised that Elkhorn High beat out Elkhorn South to tell you the truth.

[Norm Peterson]

 

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

 

As a product of public schools, I will tell you that some of my teachers were awesome and others sucked badly.  Horribly badly.  I would imagine you get the same variation in private and parochial schools.  The one that would be different would be Omaha Brownell-Talbot.  With what those families pay for tuition, the faculty better all have graduate degrees from Harvard. 

 

I would be shocked -- SHOCKED -- if Elkhorn could match the educating going on at Brownell-Talbot.

[big red22]

 

 

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

 

As a product of public schools, I will tell you that some of my teachers were awesome and others sucked badly.  Horribly badly.  I would imagine you get the same variation in private and parochial schools.  The one that would be different would be Omaha Brownell-Talbot.  With what those families pay for tuition, the faculty better all have graduate degrees from Harvard. 

 

I would be shocked -- SHOCKED -- if Elkhorn could match the educating going on at Brownell-Talbot.

 

I would have to second this.  Also Scutt has gotta be pretty damn good to for the money

[trickey]

 

 

 

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

 

As a product of public schools, I will tell you that some of my teachers were awesome and others sucked badly.  Horribly badly.  I would imagine you get the same variation in private and parochial schools.  The one that would be different would be Omaha Brownell-Talbot.  With what those families pay for tuition, the faculty better all have graduate degrees from Harvard. 

 

I would be shocked -- SHOCKED -- if Elkhorn could match the educating going on at Brownell-Talbot.

 

I would have to second this.  Also Scutt has gotta be pretty damn good to for the money

 

 

I read the article yesterday...and the article compared ONLY public schools in the states surveyed.

No Prep, Scutt, Mount Michael, Brownell-Talbot, etc. used for comparisons.

[Dean Smith]

 

 

 

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

 

As a product of public schools, I will tell you that some of my teachers were awesome and others sucked badly.  Horribly badly.  I would imagine you get the same variation in private and parochial schools.  The one that would be different would be Omaha Brownell-Talbot.  With what those families pay for tuition, the faculty better all have graduate degrees from Harvard. 

 

I would be shocked -- SHOCKED -- if Elkhorn could match the educating going on at Brownell-Talbot.

 

I would have to second this.  Also Scutt has gotta be pretty damn good to for the money

 

That's the point - money. As in they need yours to stay open. Have relatives at Skutt - still overwhelmingly going with the public schools.

[Norm Peterson]

 

 

 

 

I may hate Creighton basketball, but there is no way Elkhorn is better that Creighton Prep/Marion or even Elkhorn Mount Michael

I have talked to some people who have transferred their child out of Mount Michael because they felt it was poor academically. I've also talked to some Creighton Prep instructors personally and was not impressed. In Nebraska anyway, I'll take the public school over the private every day of the week.

 

As a product of public schools, I will tell you that some of my teachers were awesome and others sucked badly.  Horribly badly.  I would imagine you get the same variation in private and parochial schools.  The one that would be different would be Omaha Brownell-Talbot.  With what those families pay for tuition, the faculty better all have graduate degrees from Harvard. 

 

I would be shocked -- SHOCKED -- if Elkhorn could match the educating going on at Brownell-Talbot.

 

I would have to second this.  Also Scutt has gotta be pretty damn good to for the money

 

That's the point - money. As in they need yours to stay open. Have relatives at Skutt - still overwhelmingly going with the public schools.

 

Money, as in the public schools need mine to stay open as well.

 

The difference is the public schools get your money automatically.  The private schools have to compete for voluntary dollars and have to put out good enough of a product that people will want to spend extra money to send their kids there when they could just send their kids to public schools for free.  The fact that private schools exist is proof that people are willing to spend the money; ergo, they must feel they're getting something beneficial out of it that makes it worth having to pay more.

 

 

Aaaaannnnnnnyyyywaaaaay, the point of all of this was that, in a list of "the best schools in each state," Alabama got "not applicable." 

 

I just thought that was hilarious.

[49r]

 

Aaaaannnnnnnyyyywaaaaay, the point of all of this was that, in a list of "the best schools in each state," Alabama got "not applicable." 

 

I just thought that was hilarious.

 

 

 

So did South Dakota...

[AuroranHusker]

 

 

Aaaaannnnnnnyyyywaaaaay, the point of all of this was that, in a list of "the best schools in each state," Alabama got "not applicable." 

 

I just thought that was hilarious.

 

 

 

So did South Dakota...

 

 

Maybe all of them are deemed the 'best" in SD!

[Dean Smith]

nm

[Dean Smith]

The only schools that HAVE to meet standards and HAVE to test their students to see if they are meeting standards are public schools. There is the perception that private schools are better because you have to pay for them but how many parents really have any idea of what goes on at their kid's school. There are good teachers at both but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools. Some of the best people I've known have been public and private school teachers. A lot of the good private teachers do move to public schools because they will get paid more there and we all have bills to pay. 

 

The elephant in the room between public and private schools is not the education but religion. What most people are really paying for at private schools is so they can have a picture of Jesus on the wall there. And no one ever took prayer out of public schools.  Students can pray anytime they want in the public schools, they just can't have teachers tell them when they have to pray.

[49r]

All that, Dean, and they also can take comfort in knowing that their kids won't be going to school with any of those awful poor people!

[King James]

 

The only schools that HAVE to meet standards and HAVE to test their students to see if they are meeting standards are public schools. There is the perception that private schools are better because you have to pay for them but how many parents really have any idea of what goes on at their kid's school. There are good teachers at both but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools. Some of the best people I've known have been public and private school teachers. A lot of the good private teachers do move to public schools because they will get paid more there and we all have bills to pay. 

 

The elephant in the room between public and private schools is not the education but religion. What most people are really paying for at private schools is so they can have a picture of Jesus on the wall there. And no one ever took prayer out of public schools.  Students can pray anytime they want in the public schools, they just can't have teachers tell them when they have to pray.

 

Man, there are a lot of errors in this post.

 

Private schools also have to meet state standards.  If they fail to do so, they will lose their right to operate.

 

Also, state and local taxes do not go to private schools.  It is absolutely false to say, "...but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools."  While private schools may occasionally win some grants that they have to compete for, private school students or the schools pay for their own books.  If any transportation is offered at all, the student's parents pick up the tab.  Most of the time, parents of kids in extracurriculars at private schools have to contribute to the costs of the equipment, supplies, etc for those extracurriculars as well.

 

The major differences are two fold: (1) private schools do not have the facilities or money to handle most special education students; (2) private schools can more rapidly expel disciplinary problem kids than publics.

[Norm Peterson]

Public funds occasionally pay for textbooks that are used at private schools but the public school chooses which textbooks are available and the rationale behind the "sharing" arrangement is that the books are for the kids, not the school itself.  And since the student is a citizen of the state and child of a taxpayer, why should it depend on where the kid goes to school as to whether he/she gets books or not?

[Dean Smith]

 

 

The only schools that HAVE to meet standards and HAVE to test their students to see if they are meeting standards are public schools. There is the perception that private schools are better because you have to pay for them but how many parents really have any idea of what goes on at their kid's school. There are good teachers at both but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools. Some of the best people I've known have been public and private school teachers. A lot of the good private teachers do move to public schools because they will get paid more there and we all have bills to pay. 

 

The elephant in the room between public and private schools is not the education but religion. What most people are really paying for at private schools is so they can have a picture of Jesus on the wall there. And no one ever took prayer out of public schools.  Students can pray anytime they want in the public schools, they just can't have teachers tell them when they have to pray.

 

Man, there are a lot of errors in this post.

 

Private schools also have to meet state standards.  If they fail to do so, they will lose their right to operate.

 

Also, state and local taxes do not go to private schools.  It is absolutely false to say, "...but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools."  While private schools may occasionally win some grants that they have to compete for, private school students or the schools pay for their own books.  If any transportation is offered at all, the student's parents pick up the tab.  Most of the time, parents of kids in extracurriculars at private schools have to contribute to the costs of the equipment, supplies, etc for those extracurriculars as well.

 

The major differences are two fold: (1) private schools do not have the facilities or money to handle most special education students; (2) private schools can more rapidly expel disciplinary problem kids than publics.

 

 

Public funds occasionally pay for textbooks that are used at private schools but the public school chooses which textbooks are available and the rationale behind the "sharing" arrangement is that the books are for the kids, not the school itself.  And since the student is a citizen of the state and child of a taxpayer, why should it depend on where the kid goes to school as to whether he/she gets books or not?

Doesn't - it's just that many people apparently like King James doen't realize that public funds are spent on almost everything but teachers salaries at private schools (the supreme court "too  intrusive" ruling).

[Dean Smith]

 

 

The only schools that HAVE to meet standards and HAVE to test their students to see if they are meeting standards are public schools. There is the perception that private schools are better because you have to pay for them but how many parents really have any idea of what goes on at their kid's school. There are good teachers at both but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools. Some of the best people I've known have been public and private school teachers. A lot of the good private teachers do move to public schools because they will get paid more there and we all have bills to pay. 

 

The elephant in the room between public and private schools is not the education but religion. What most people are really paying for at private schools is so they can have a picture of Jesus on the wall there. And no one ever took prayer out of public schools.  Students can pray anytime they want in the public schools, they just can't have teachers tell them when they have to pray.

 

Man, there are a lot of errors in this post.

 

Private schools also have to meet state standards.  If they fail to do so, they will lose their right to operate.

 

Also, state and local taxes do not go to private schools.  It is absolutely false to say, "...but both private and public schools are also both supported by your tax dollars. Public funds pay for books, transportation, equipment, etc. at private schools."  While private schools may occasionally win some grants that they have to compete for, private school students or the schools pay for their own books.  If any transportation is offered at all, the student's parents pick up the tab.  Most of the time, parents of kids in extracurriculars at private schools have to contribute to the costs of the equipment, supplies, etc for those extracurriculars as well.

 

The major differences are two fold: (1) private schools do not have the facilities or money to handle most special education students; (2) private schools can more rapidly expel disciplinary problem kids than publics.

 

Public education is supposed to be a state thing according to the 10th amendment so each state has there own rules. I don't know what happens in other states, but whether private schools take the NESA tests that public schools have to (and then get put on a list rating how they did) is completely voluntary for private schools. In Nebraska the private schools do not have to partake in the state assessments covering specific educational standards created by the state school board. They do have to meet certain criteria (such as offering a particular set of classes) to stay accredited by the state to stay open. So in that sense they must meet the state standards for accreditation but that wasn't what I was trying to talk about.

 

Dealing with transportation issues, I'm not an expert on all of the private school transportation but if you go to most towns that have both private and public schools you will see both sets of kids getting on the same busses every morning and getting off of them every night. Those are paid for by the taxes of everyone, whether you send kids to private schools, public schools, your kids have graduated 10 years ago, or you never had kids. I certainly don't think it's a bad thing but it's a thing. Public schools buys books with said tax dollars and then puts some of them on carts or loads them in vehicles and takes them to the local private schools for their use. Again it might be different for every district but there are some districts that I know of that members from both the public and private schools make up the curriculum committee and pick out the books to be purchased together.  Same thing with various types of equipment and things like science lab supplies. I've been part of a group of people helping in this type of transportation. Unfortunately, in most states parents of kids in extracurriculars in both private and public schools have to pay for their kids to play and we may be headed down that path in Nebraska as well. 

 

Private schools do have to raise funds for much if not most of their operation but they do receive support by public tax dollars. There are good public and private schools and well as bad in both categories. My life experiences are certainly different than yours but mine tell me that on average I would prefer to see any kids I may or may not have attend public schools. 

 

I think you are correct in your number one - private schools don't usually have the funding to pay for special needs students where public schools are obligated to educate everyone in their district. That also makes the kicking kids out thing in your number two correct. I have conducted no scientific polling and I am aware that anecdotal evidence can  be very misleading (and downright wrong many times) but when I hear friends and relatives talk about why their kids are in private school, a Christian education has always been brought up before the good schools thing. Again,  not a bad thing but a thing. Which I'm willing to admit is totally wrong is someone has done some scientific polling and the results are completely different than my conclussion.