Private school students scoop scholarships. BIG surprise, huh?

[whatgotwhat]

You can hide this advertisement by registering.

Originally Posted by Ali -

you have also read may articles confirming public school graduates do better at Uni than private grads

this is the dumbest thing i've read in the last month. congrats.

[whatgotwhat]

all that article said is that out of the 20 students offered scholarships and who accepted, 17 of them were from private schools. this means that the majority of students who got perfect VCE scores were from private schools. a clear majority.

this is the same as every other year. face it: private schools consistently do better. there are only two possible explanations:

- private school students have access to a better education (better teachers etc.)
- private school studnets are inherently smarter

the second option is absolutely ridiculous and not true. the first option is true. if you want your child to have the best education possible, send him to a private school. if you can't afford it? tough titties. he can go to a public school and study his guts out and beat the private school kids. people are too obsessed with having their kid in the same school, forgetting that success in the VCE is not completely determined by who's teaching you and where they are teaching you. when you walk into that exam, it's just you and your brain. not mr mason's, not mrs kelly's. quit your whining, i say.

[Ali -]

Originally Posted by whatgotwhat

this is the dumbest thing i've read in the last month. congrats.

the 'may' should have read 'many', so do excuse typos.

my statements were derived from the reading of numerous articles over a number of years. (I'm not straight out of high school). So how about you try to figure out typos in sentence and do some of your own 'wide' research before making derogatory comments.

At the end of the day, you are in agreement that private education does in fact give you an edge. Others in this thread were not agreeing with that statement.

[gab101]

Rather than change the current system of university selection i think that the government should focus on changing the public school system.

[humphdogg]

Originally Posted by Ali -

Hi ephemeral. Been a while since my VCE :-)

You may disagree with that notion by all means, but I'm sure you have also read may articles confirming public school graduates do better at Uni than private grads, in general, due to Uni's not spoon feeding their pupils.

We can agree to disagree :-)

I've seen several studies on this, and I'm still not certain. I went to a private school and have seen several of my friends drop out of university. But then again, plenty of my school friends are still at uni, and I also know plenty of public school graduates who've dropped out of uni.

Get in, stay in, or drop out - theage.com.au

Andrew Norton � Blog Archive � School type and uni completion

^^ Some interesting articles on the matter. In any case, I feel that the students who get 99.95 deserve their scholarships. Remember that although many of these students are private school students, most of them would've been on an academic scholarship at this private school anyway.

The spoon-feeding argument is always over-hyped anyway. And if you want to look at a system where independent study is imperative, try doing the IB.

[whatgotwhat]

Originally Posted by Ali -

the 'may' should have read 'many', so do excuse typos.

my statements were derived from the reading of numerous articles over a number of years. (I'm not straight out of high school). So how about you try to figure out typos in sentence and do some of your own 'wide' research before making derogatory comments.

At the end of the day, you are in agreement that private education does in fact give you an edge. Others in this thread were not agreeing with that statement.

ah, i thought 'may' was meant to be 'my.' it's still a very stupid statement, though it's not you saying it. so i guess i'm sorry.

[Ali -]

Interesting articles humphdogg.

Below are some with different views:


Buckingham J
Educare News; n.107 p.16; September 2000

[Extract]
"Private schools achieve better results than public schools. Performance data by school sector are very difficult to obtain. However, it appears that private school students achieve better academic results, on average, than public school students, and are more likely to complete school to Year 12. This effect remains even after taking into account familybackground, including income.

Private school students have better post-school outcomes. Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) revealed that students from private
schools were more likely to have entered higher education from Year 12 and to have participated in higher education by age 19. This remained the case even after controlling for background family variables (Long, Carpenter & Hayden, 1999). The LSAY also found that attendance at a private school tended to reduce the chance of being unemployed after leaving school (Marks & Plemming 1998)."

Other:
http://www.worldbank.org/html/dec/Pu...RBvol3no1.html
http://privateschool.about.com/cs/em...advantages.htm

Hence, educators have long since been debating this issue. For every paper on side presents, the other counters with an opposing paper.

Putting aside academic papers and media papers, I look back upon my own experiences:
* year 11 Physics teacher commences a class by saying, "So who's going out with who?" and spends the rest of the hour on school gossip;

* year 9 Math teacher could not control the class with paper planes flying everywhere and noise so loud I could hardly hear him;

* Physics and Chemistry was not even offered at the year 12 level due to lack of demand and resources. Since I achieved A's in year 11, they offered to combine year 11 and year 12 classes whereby I would receive 1/2 the tuition time (is that equal time to what other students received around the State? would this even be an option at any private school?)

These are just a few examples. Of course, there were the rare good teachers who were better able to 'manage' the environment. None of the comments I have made (and nor do I presume comments made by others in this thread) applies to every public or private school.

It is not rocket science to conclude that placing an individual in a resource deprived institution with an 'overall' culture where discipline is not duly enforced will NOT perform to his/her maximum potential than if he/she were placed in a more positive and educationally cultivating environment which is MORE widely found in 'most' private schools than in 'most' public schools.

How anyone can deny this is beyond my comprehension.

I'm happy for any student who has performed well at the VCE level, public or private. ALL students are our future leaders. I just get saddened that when an exceptional student at Kealba or Springvale achieves a 96 or 98 ENTER, that they "just" miss out on studying law at their preferred institution and cannot help but wonder 'what if' they were fortunate enough to have attended Haileybury instead?

Anyway, to each their own opinion :-)

[pineapplebaby]

Originally Posted by gab101

Rather than change the current system of university selection i think that the government should focus on changing the public school system.

Rather than the government focusing on changing the public school system, i think people should just go home and make the best of what they have. We keep talking about achieving equality in all realms of society, and in this thread, education in particular. But consider how the society works: better returns for greater monetary input, better education for the wealthy.

Considering this, the education system in Aus isn't going to change for a LONG time.

but anyway, great discussion guys. keep it up

[Ali -]

Hi, Pineapplebaby. Yes, it has turned out to be an interesting thread.

Inequalities do exist all around us. Sometimes they are even desirable as it provides individuals with ‘incentive’ to strive towards achieving a better standard of living for oneself or family. Equality in all realms of society is not only impossible due to various factors, including but not limited to, the I.Q. bell curve of the population, but undesirable, as we not only need a population of professionals, but also para-professionals, production-line workers and the like.

When it comes to education, I believe that inequalities not only exist, but are ‘undersirable’. Without a doubt, many parents of private school students work hard to pay tuition fees, and some were born into money due to the business acumen of their forefathers. But what of the capable student born into a single parent family struggling to pay the rent or put food on the table? That student is more than capable of achieving excellent grades just from his/her genetical make up for intelligence. But let’s remember that to MAXIMISE one’s potentional, not only do you need ‘nature’, but you also need ‘nurture’. This is the “comparative advantage” that private schools offer over public schools.

This thread is not addressing other advantages a public school may offer such as the development of better social skills between the sexes, but was limited by this thread’s originator to the achievement of ENTER scores.

Although I believe that a stark disparity exists between the private and public educational systems, it is at least not as pronounced as it is in the United States. I put forward to those who contend that the educational institution has no bearing on academic achievement that they go and attend a public school in the Bronx, U.S. where they will realise that “success” in such public schools is measured by limiting teen pregnancy and reducing gang-related murders not by invitations to Harvard.

Will an equivalent to a 99.95 ENTER be as easily achievable in such an environment?

[humphdogg]

Originally Posted by Ali -

Interesting articles humphdogg.

Below are some with different views:


Buckingham J
Educare News; n.107 p.16; September 2000

[Extract]
"Private schools achieve better results than public schools. Performance data by school sector are very difficult to obtain. However, it appears that private school students achieve better academic results, on average, than public school students, and are more likely to complete school to Year 12. This effect remains even after taking into account familybackground, including income.

Private school students have better post-school outcomes. Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) revealed that students from private
schools were more likely to have entered higher education from Year 12 and to have participated in higher education by age 19. This remained the case even after controlling for background family variables (Long, Carpenter & Hayden, 1999). The LSAY also found that attendance at a private school tended to reduce the chance of being unemployed after leaving school (Marks & Plemming 1998)."

Other:
Public schools--and private: Which are more efficient?
Teaching - 4 Reasons To Teach In A Private School

Hence, educators have long since been debating this issue. For every paper on side presents, the other counters with an opposing paper.

Putting aside academic papers and media papers, I look back upon my own experiences:
* year 11 Physics teacher commences a class by saying, "So who's going out with who?" and spends the rest of the hour on school gossip;

* year 9 Math teacher could not control the class with paper planes flying everywhere and noise so loud I could hardly hear him;

* Physics and Chemistry was not even offered at the year 12 level due to lack of demand and resources. Since I achieved A's in year 11, they offered to combine year 11 and year 12 classes whereby I would receive 1/2 the tuition time (is that equal time to what other students received around the State? would this even be an option at any private school?)

These are just a few examples. Of course, there were the rare good teachers who were better able to 'manage' the environment. None of the comments I have made (and nor do I presume comments made by others in this thread) applies to every public or private school.

It is not rocket science to conclude that placing an individual in a resource deprived institution with an 'overall' culture where discipline is not duly enforced will NOT perform to his/her maximum potential than if he/she were placed in a more positive and educationally cultivating environment which is MORE widely found in 'most' private schools than in 'most' public schools.

How anyone can deny this is beyond my comprehension.

I'm happy for any student who has performed well at the VCE level, public or private. ALL students are our future leaders. I just get saddened that when an exceptional student at Kealba or Springvale achieves a 96 or 98 ENTER, that they "just" miss out on studying law at their preferred institution and cannot help but wonder 'what if' they were fortunate enough to have attended Haileybury instead?

Anyway, to each their own opinion :-)

By the sounds of it, you went to a worse-than-average public school. From what friends have told me, the public schools they went to did encourage the top students but weren't able to enforce the middle students to be as interested in their studies as they ought to be (the bottom students at private schools are just as bad as those at public schools though, in my opinion, though there are perhaps fewer of them).

I don't think anyone could deny that the classroom of a mediocre public school will be disrupted much more often than that of a good private school, but even decent private schools can have very dud teachers that lead to incredibly unproductive classes. And many private schools are at the same level as your average public school when it comes to final marks (not APS-level schools, obviously, but lower private schools).

Nevertheless, I do agree with you that students who achieve a mark of 96 or 98 at extremely mediocre public schools deserve every bit of acknowledgement for their outstanding achievement. But as to whether their results at university will be as high as someone who got 99.50 or so at a top-notch private school - well, it's too big a call to make. You don't know in the slightest how things might turn out; I have a friend at uni who got 99.70 at a public school and studies his arse off at uni, but doesn't get nearly as good results as someone who got 98 at a good private school. Unis give scholarships to 99.95ers because they've proved themselves so far.

[Ali -]

Yes, humphdogg, there are indeed many factors that contribute to overall success.

To keep it short and in a nutshell, it seems to me that you are becoming agreeable to the notion that:

"all else the same"...private schools (in general) do provide a "comparative advantage" to public schools (in general) in offering a more conducive environment to maximise one's ENTER score.

[humphdogg]

Originally Posted by Ali -

Yes, humphdogg, there are indeed many factors that contribute to overall success.

To keep it short and in a nutshell, it seems to me that you are becoming agreeable to the notion that:

"all else the same"...private schools (in general) do provide a "comparative advantage" to public schools (in general) in offering a more conducive environment to maximise one's ENTER score.

Oh definitely. But the divide is greatest around the 80-90 mark, not at the 99 mark. A smart student will get 99 at any school. Indeed, I know of a student this year who got 99.65 at an extremely mediocre public school (the next highest student was around 91 or so). The point I'm trying to make is that 99.95ers will always be 99.95ers, regardless of which school they are at. So the original poster's point is very much lost on me.

[Ali -]

Originally Posted by humphdogg

Oh definitely. But the divide is greatest around the 80-90 mark, not at the 99 mark. A smart student will get 99 at any school. Indeed, I know of a student this year who got 99.65 at an extremely mediocre public school (the next highest student was around 91 or so). The point I'm trying to make is that 99.95ers will always be 99.95ers, regardless of which school they are at. So the original poster's point is very much lost on me.

We almost agree :-) and disagreement is also fine.

Even if the disparity is most pronounced at the 80-90 range, as you stated, I still contend that not all potential 99.95’s will attain that score, and may just miss out on their desired course/institution due to poorer tutelage, resources etc.

'Some’ may be able to do so, but this depends on the degree of disparity. If the potential 99.95’ers intellectual capabilities have fallen through the cracks of the educational system and not been accepted into/or sought entry to Melbourne High/MacRobertsons, and does not reside in the high priced zones of Balwyn or McKinnon for example, but is in fact “stuck” at Kealba, Springvale, Copperfield etc, then even a genius with a 200 I.Q. will not receive a 99.95 ENTER. Why? Due to the previous points I made in earlier posts.

These students have to sometimes reinvent the wheel themselves (which takes precious time out of their year whilst other schools have moved onto other topics) or are NOT shown certain problem solving techniques to which students of other schools have been exposed.

How many potential high achievers in the Bronx reach Harvard? Ben Cousins or any other player out of the “elite system” finds it difficult if not impossible to compete at that same level again. Why? Have they mysteriously lost natual ability? No, but due to them being out of a system which “cultivates” ones abilities to the maximum. When the potential 99.95’er who attended some dodgy public schools gets to the final and most difficult question on a Math exam for example, he/she has never been exposed to any material to the one which faces them...bam!..98 Enter instead.

In my view, as opposed to your view, is that a 99.95’er will NOT necessarily be able to achieve that score regardless of their school. It depends on the level of disparity.

Anyway...enough said by me on this topic. Congratulations to not only the high achievers, but to all the students who did their best. At least then, you can look back and be content that you gave your all in the situation you found yourself in. Whether privileged or unprivileged.

[SmRandmAzn]

Those students who got 99.95 at those private schools are most likely on full scholarships to their private schools anyway...

Private schools perform better than government schools. This is undeniable. The only thing that can be argued are the reasons for this

-> Going to a private school does not necessarily mean you are of the "upper class". With the price of private schools it is possible for more average families who want their children to perform well to pay the fees and to sacrifice financially for this. Children from these families probably care more about study, or the parents wouldn't bother wasting money on a kid that can't be stuffed. These kids get higher in the VCE than someone from an average government school who couldn't care less about study.

-> These kids with families that care about academics get sent to these private schools. When you are surrounded by smarter kids, your potential increases enormously.

This is my theory anyway. I haven't actually gone to a private school, but I've been to two very, very different levels of government school. At my first school everything was pretty relaxed, and the dux got around 97 or so. At my second school a bit under a fifth of the school get above 99, and the average is about 95. When you are surrounded by high performing students, you will naturally be at an advantage than being smart by yourself. When I was at the first school, I was one of the top students, but now I'm just the middle of the pack. But I would rather be in the middle of this pack, because I can at least see those above me, and learn from them.

[qwerthey]

Originally Posted by SmRandmAzn

Those students who got 99.95 at those private schools are most likely on full scholarships to their private schools anyway...

I know this for a fact. Quoted for truth.

Originally Posted by SmRandmAzn

Going to a private school does not necessarily mean you are of the "upper class". With the price of private schools it is possible for more average families who want their children to perform well to pay the fees and to sacrifice financially for this. Children from these families probably care more about study, or the parents wouldn't bother wasting money on a kid that can't be stuffed. These kids get higher in the VCE than someone from an average government school who couldn't care less about study.

Absolutely correct.

Originally Posted by SmRandmAzn

-> These kids with families that care about academics get sent to these private schools. When you are surrounded by smarter kids, your potential increases enormously.

Not quite, kids in private schools are no different in intelligence, than kids in public schools. The difference are the scholarship students.

Wasn't it just a few years ago, that FOUR students from Glen Waverly Secondary scored 99.95? Surely that's case in point. No one can be certain of the relative advantages or disadvantages of going to private school, however, results over the years have shown that 99.95 is achievable from either bracket.

For the record, I have been to a private school for 9 out of my 13 years of schooling, and private schooling, especially for boys schools isn't as easy-going as you'd think. They are countless commitments to school functions, community service is a given, and 5-6 hours of sport OUTSIDE of school hours per week. To each his or her own. Private school teachers are generally no different from public school teachers. Some are amazing, some are depressingly bad.

Who knows what difference to your ENTER, a private or public education can have? I do know that excuses and bitterness towards 'those damn private snobs', is hardly justifiable. It's like comparing apples and oranges, you can try but it just leads to confusion, colour-blindness and a fruity mess.

Peace out.