public school or private school to do better in HSC? (2 Viewers)

[Conspiración]

You have no idea what you are talking about.
I attend a highly ranked selective school.
You definitely are allowed to do pathways.
You definitely are allowed to repeat your HSC.
Infact there are 3 or 4 people in my grade that actually do pathways.

Did I say that they aren't able to? No.
Did I say that it would be more difficult to argue their case? Yes.
For me, personally, as I have clearly expressed, this has been the case.
So from a personal and completely subjective perspective;
Public>Private/Selective.

Although we only allow Advanced english, there is one person doing standard english because the school provides for the individuals needs.

I'm not saying that they can't accommodate those particular needs. But you'll have to put up a fight for it if you're the only student in the entire school who wants to take a subject which isn't deemed of high calibre. If you're going to a selective school for "stupid" subjects, it brings us to the question of what the hell are you doing there in the first place?
They generally look for all-rounders.

It is because of the people that occupy the school (intelligence)

I have to disagree with you here. I have met many selective schools students (Sydney Tech) who are the most thick-headed people you will ever come across.
Intelligence isn't a determining factor in your ability to ace exams (not a major factor, anyway). It's their memory - their ability to memorise and regurgitate. This applies to all students, I'd say.

I was talking to the teacher, and basically a public selective school follows the same guidelines as a normal comprehensive public school.
I.e. The grounds for expulsion/suspension are the same.
It is not "more" strict.

Of course they are going to say it's the same.
But when you're almost suspended for wetting your hair in the midst of summer, yes - I would think it is a lot more "strict". Private schools, mind you. Not selective - I wouldn't know.

I can't say anything for private schools though.

I can't say anything for selective schools. So you'll have to take my word for it about the private schools I attended and I'll take your word that YOUR school runs that particular way. We can't generalise. But I've been to 2 private schools and my siblings attended a 3rd (different) one. The consequences only became more "severe" with each new private school. So obviously I have the idea that many others would also operate in the same way.

You've never been to a public selective school.

No, I have not. I made this clear. Your point is?

I should have elaborated... you said there are 'many things you cannot say or do'. I'm saying that's bull. I don't know about private schools, but I don't feel those restrictions imposed upon me at a selective school. But w/e, it might just be better if you clarified what these restrictions are.

Darling, I clearly said I hadn't been to a selective school.
I don't know how things operate there.
But I was comparing what I do, for a fact, know: private and public schools. One ridiculous example I can give you off the top of my head is no running whatsoever (this applies to both priv schools I've been to as well as the one my siblings attended for less than a term before they cried to go back to their previous - public - school), even on grass - oh, wait, that's right, private schools can't afford grass; and the compulsory scripture classes - like I give a fuck? These classes are optional at public schools.
Oh, and the consequences of cussing at a private school will result in a lot more than detention or an apology.
The private system is so uptight it's unbelievable. Imagine the Catholic Church (or whatever you wish) ruling your education. Tell me there aren't going to be any restrictions!!

Wrong again. Whilst top ranking selective schools may be unhappy about having their students repeat or do Pathways, they won't actually discourage or refuse them from doing so. They want the students to achieve the best possible UAI they can even if it means deferring their HSC- because the 'all-mighty image' of the school is dependent on the results of their students, and if they can be improved by deferring their HSC then so be it.

I agree but what I'd said is that they would have a harder time trying to convince their teachers/whomever that pathways or repeating etc is the best option for them. It's not impossible, but it's a bit of a challenge for the student, sitting in a highly ranked school which other students would kill to get into to say "You know what? I think I should hang around for a while longer."
It's because of this competition to get into these schools that it is unfair to hold onto a student who is taking it slower or repeating when a much more capable student can come, finish, and adiós!

The Scots College, as an ELITE private school, would not allow teachers of low quality to teach their. I mean the principal has a PhD. I couldn't find much information on the other teachers though.

Elite or not, all schools will claim they only employ the best teachers. No school is going to say "We have crap teachers, take your kids elsewhere." Comprendes?
Perhaps you may be right - it takes a PhD to teach kids the difference between "their" and "there".

Consequently, who do you think gets to cherry pick the best teachers?
Selective public schools get teachers from the staffing pool on the same basis as every other public school, so you will not necessarily have a better teacher just because you are in selective school (as several posters on this thread have mentioned).

Thank you, Department of Education and Training.

 

[ichiraku]

Undalay, you go to FSHS don't you? Everything you mentioned in your post points right to it lol. Oh man, I miss that school.

Btw, to whoever mentioned that point regarding the principal having a PhD - a PhD is in no way an indication of the ability to teach well or run a school. It's merely a testament to your ability to conduct research and endure a few years of hell. You'll know what I mean when you go to uni and have some "Dr" standing at the front who couldn't even teach to save their life.

 

[undalay]

Did I say that they aren't able to? No.
Did I say that it would be more difficult to argue their case? Yes.
For me, personally, as I have clearly expressed, this has been the case.
So from a personal and completely subjective perspective;
Public>Private/Selective.

I'd love to see someone at James Ruse etc doing Pathways or repeating their HSC

Firstly it sounds like you are infering that they can't.

No, I have not. I made this clear. Your point is?

My point is, you can't speak for selective schools. So don't. Just because you are under the impression that things are harder to attain, does not make it true.

I'm not saying that they can't accommodate those particular needs. But you'll have to put up a fight for it if you're the only student in the entire school who wants to take a subject which isn't deemed of high calibre. If you're going to a selective school for "stupid" subjects, it brings us to the question of what the hell are you doing there in the first place?
They generally look for all-rounders.

Its the same for Public schools.
What if only one person wants to do a "smart" subject.

I have to disagree with you here. I have met many selective schools students (Sydney Tech) who are the most thick-headed people you will ever come across.

As a whole group, they > normal schools.

Intelligence isn't a determining factor in your ability to ace exams (not a major factor, anyway). It's their memory - their ability to memorise and regurgitate. This applies to all students, I'd say.

The idea of intelligence is always debateable so let us not go into that.

I can't say anything for selective schools.

You have refered to selective schools numerous times.

 

[BackCountrySnow]

Btw, to whoever mentioned that point regarding the principal having a PhD - a PhD is in no way an indication of the ability to teach well or run a school. It's merely a testament to your ability to conduct research and endure a few years of hell.

I know a guy who loved doing his phd. Not relevant to the discussion but I thought I might add it.

If you look at the list provided by the smh or telegraph, you can see that the top schools consist of selective and private schools. Yes, there are private schools that are pathetic but all up they do better.

Intelligence isn't a determining factor in your ability to ace exams (not a major factor, anyway). It's their memory - their ability to memorise and regurgitate. This applies to all students, I'd say.

Nope, your good memory will only get you so far. lol, memorise and regurgitate. I think your ability to understand the actual concepts is much more important.

 

[foram]

Nope, your good memory will only get you so far. lol, memorise and regurgitate. I think your ability to understand the actual concepts is much more important.

true. memory isn't going to get you through 4u math.

 

[midifile]

Geez conspiracion. you dont have to be so fucking defensive

We can't generalise. But I've been to 2 private schools and my siblings attended a 3rd (different) one. The consequences only became more "severe" with each new private school. So obviously I have the idea that many others would also operate in the same way.

Talk about contradictions. You say that "we can't generalise" and everything you have posted on this thread has been generalisations from you and your siblings experiences.

and the compulsory scripture classes - like I give a fuck? These classes are optional at public schools.
Oh, and the consequences of cussing at a private school will result in a lot more than detention or an apology.
The private system is so uptight it's unbelievable. Imagine the Catholic Church (or whatever you wish) ruling your education. Tell me there aren't going to be any restrictions!!

Not every private school has compulsary scripture lessons - perhaps it is because you go to a religous school NOT a private school.

And as for the uptight thing...
I go to an extreamly laid back private school.

As for punishments and "speaking your mind"
Students can pretty much speak their mind without getting in trouble (unless it is bullying, being racist, swearing at teachers etc). But kids can swear in the presence of teachers, and the teachers actually seem to realise that we are teenagers. My school is anything but uptight, and unlike you i'm not going to sit here and go "because my school isn't uptight then every other private school in NSW must be the same" because I know they are not. But as for your generalisations - I dont think that you can speak from your experiences - two schools do not represent the whole of the state.

And btw. Despite the laid back attitude of my school, we are still one of the top schools in the state (top 20)

 

[nayyarv]

It seems like no-one is arguing on the side of the private schools, so i thought i should defend my school

How do you judge a school?
You can't judge a school on its performance. James Russe has all the smartest kids from the exam, and isnt it unfair if they get the top rank if all the smartest kids go there. Similarly a dropkick school where only dropkicks go to will have a shit rank because they have only shit students. If we swapped the students, would the results be the same?

It is true private school kids have the highest dropout rates at university. Some say it is because we are spoon-fed at school, but i can tell u i am not spoon fed at school. The real reason - i have no idea.

Private schools do not really choose their students like selective, nor do they expell disruptive students. You are only expelled for smoking, drugs or stealing, something that most schools would expell you for. We have comps where we scream penis as loud as we can, and teachers dont really mind, unless there are exams soon. True we have stupid uniform rules, and some teachers actually care, but a majority don't and usually cover for us during probs if we know each other pritty well.

In short private schools usually have an average batch of kids, in the general spread of students, from dumb to genius, and they still perform better than true average of the state. That is more indicative of a good school than results. In james russe, considering they get the cream of the crop, they should be getting at least 90% Band 6 in all subjects they do (10% for those that mind blank in the exams). But they don't. In fact from the testing in year 7 to yr 12, the results appear to go down instead of increasing. This is probably because most kids while smart, arent doing as well as they were in OC. i mean u get 90% and u r considered dumb. Its really disheartening, and u lose motivation to study. its different if u start dumb and remain dumb, but if u start smart and end up dumb it sux. These kids form the tail-end of James Russe, the ones that dont get band 6 in everything.

What private schools (or at least mine) have emphasis on is success in all facets of life. At private schools, the sporty kids get more emphasis on sports so maybe they can win a sports scholarship (a couple of kids from last year have been signed on for the west tigers development or sumthin), smart kids get put into top classes and learn more, music students are encouraged, people good with their hands put on exhibitions, actors can put on plays. My school doesnt measure its results acaedaemically, and in fact in the reunions there is usually a >90% attendance, of all people who live in the city

Also, the IB (international Bacclaureate). This is not counted in the results, and most private schools offer the IB. This is a big drain in smart kids, because the Ib is far harder than the HSC. It potentially robs the school of 10 Premier Awardees each year, and a couple of years age (last year was just plain dumb), there could have been upwards of 30 premier awardees with the IB combined.

This leaves a perception of private schools as schools not that great, but if u are average, u get smarter in a private school, while if u are really smart, ur probly best of in a selective school. if ur interests are not acadaemic, private schools provide a lot for you, that selective schools would not

Im happy with my school, many tell me i could have made Russe, but i dont mind i never tried for it. I play a lotta basketball and tennis, and can pursue watever sport i feel like. Everyone is really friendly and the teachers are really awesome. im happy, and even if my UAI suffers a little from being at Trinity rather than Russe

I dont care

 

[lyounamu]

Im happy with my school, many tell me i could have made Russe, but i dont mind i never tried for it. I play a lotta basketball and tennis, and can pursue watever sport i feel like. Everyone is really friendly and the teachers are really awesome. im happy, and even if my UAI suffers a little from being at Trinity rather than Russe

I dont care

That above post is like a copy version of my opinion.

I agree with every single word of wisdom in your post.

I am going to say that I cannot be satisfied more with my school even though it is not the best academic school. My school provides everything that I would need to succeed in HSC. I have got great friends who help me out, I have got great teachers who are full of innovations, ideas & care. I also could have enrolled in Selective High School like ordinary Asian kids (like my brother), but I don't as I never tried for exam ('couldn't' is a better word as I came to Australia in year 8). Even if I could try for Selective High School exam, I wouldn't have done it as I owe to my school more that my school owes to me.

It is also important to note that schools don't necessarily determine what you get in HSC. I never got 'spoon-fed' and will not even ask for it. I love being challenged and I would never ask for that extra advantage that can give me extra edge. I sometimes hate people determining who you are based on school like my mom's friends & my mom. But I don't care as I constantly try to prove my worth and my potential. I may not go to the top school, but I hold my head high and proudly say that I attend St Pius X College.

I also know that if I perform well at my school and beat those Selective School kids, I can really hold my head high and y say to myself "good job, Namu". I will never let others determine who I am because of the school I go to.

 

[melanieeeee.]

I may not go to the top school, but I hold my head high and proudly say that I attend St Piux X College.

My brother goes to your school.

 

[foram]

Sydney grammar is a very good private school. But selective schools are public and most of the top schools are selective schools.

 

[ccc123]

How do you judge a school?
You can't judge a school on its performance.

Well, since the OP's question was relating to performance in the HSC, what other criteria would you propose we judge a school by?

We have comps where we scream penis as loud as we can, and teachers dont really mind, unless there are exams soon.

Please elucidate how this supports your pro-private school argument.

True we have stupid uniform rules, and some teachers actually care, but a majority don't and usually cover for us during probs if we know each other pritty well.

Please spell properly.

In short private schools usually have an average batch of kids, in the general spread of students, from dumb to genius, and they still perform better than true average of the state. That is more indicative of a good school than results.

But the OP's question wasn't 'what schools perform above the state average?', it was 'do public or private schools perform better in the HSC?' And that is the issue of contention.

In james russe, considering they get the cream of the crop, they should be getting at least 90% Band 6 in all subjects they do (10% for those that mind blank in the exams). But they don't. In fact from the testing in year 7 to yr 12, the results appear to go down instead of increasing. This is probably because most kids while smart, arent doing as well as they were in OC. i mean u get 90% and u r considered dumb. Its really disheartening, and u lose motivation to study. its different if u start dumb and remain dumb, but if u start smart and end up dumb it sux. These kids form the tail-end of James Russe, the ones that dont get band 6 in everything.

Why are you giving us an analysis of James Ruse?

What private schools (or at least mine) have emphasis on is success in all facets of life. At private schools, the sporty kids get more emphasis on sports so maybe they can win a sports scholarship (a couple of kids from last year have been signed on for the west tigers development or sumthin), smart kids get put into top classes and learn more, music students are encouraged, people good with their hands put on exhibitions, actors can put on plays. My school doesnt measure its results acaedaemically, and in fact in the reunions there is usually a >90% attendance, of all people who live in the city.

If you're trying to insinuate that private schools are superior because they provide a 'holistic' education, I hate to burst your bubble, but the majority of schools, whether public or private, strive to offer maximum opportunities and foster a well-rounded environment.

Also, the IB (international Bacclaureate). This is not counted in the results, and most private schools offer the IB. This is a big drain in smart kids, because the Ib is far harder than the HSC. It potentially robs the school of 10 Premier Awardees each year, and a couple of years age (last year was just plain dumb), there could have been upwards of 30 premier awardees with the IB combined. .

Why do they choose to do the 'IB' then? And if the 'IB' is "far harder" than the HSC, why is it that last year, the equivlent UAI for 45/45 in the IB was 99.8?

This leaves a perception of private schools as schools not that great, but if u are average, u get smarter in a private school, while if u are really smart, ur probly best of in a selective school. if ur interests are not acadaemic, private schools provide a lot for you, that selective schools would not.

Such as superfluous facilities like underground car-parks and tennis courts? Are these essential to your "success in all facets of life"?

Im happy with my school, many tell me i could have made Russe, but i dont mind i never tried for it. I play a lotta basketball and tennis, and can pursue watever sport i feel like. Everyone is really friendly and the teachers are really awesome. im happy, and even if my UAI suffers a little from being at Trinity rather than Russe

I dont care

Good for you, but the topic of the thread isn't whether private schools offer more sport, or let you play the 'penis' game. It is whether public or private schools perform better IN THE HSC. And you've basically just admitted that when it comes to that "facet of life", you're inferior.

 

[foram]

poor nayyarv.

 

[melanieeeee.]

!!!!!

Is he in my year?

nah he is in year 10 lol

 

[midifile]

Well, since the OP's question was relating to performance in the HSC, what other criteria would you propose we judge a school by?




Please elucidate how this supports your pro-private school argument.



Please spell properly.



But the op's question wasn't 'what schools perform above the state average?', it was 'do public or private schools perform better in the HSC?' And that is the issue of contention.




Why are you giving us an analysis of James Ruse?



If you're trying to insinuate that private schools are superior because they provide a 'holistic' education, I hate to burst your bubble, but the majority of schools, whether public or private, strive to offer maximum opportunities and foster a well-rounded environment.



Why do they choose to do the 'IB' then? And if the 'IB' is "far harder" than the HSC, why is it that last year, the equivlent UAI for 45/45 in the IB was 99.8?



Such as superfluous facilities like underground car-parks and tennis courts? Are these essential to your "success in all facets of life"?




Good for you, but the topic of the thread isn't whether private schools offer more sport, or let you play the 'penis' game. It is whether public or private schools perform better IN THE HSC. And you've basically just admitted that when it comes to that "facet of life", you're inferior.

Perhaps you should take the stick out of your arse and calm down.

The OP was about all areas of school life as it says they come up even in parts and asks what makes one better than the other. If it was just which does better in the HSC then there would be no point of this discussion as looking at school rankings you can see that on average private schools do better than public (not including selective). But i'm not gonna sit here and say "all private schools are better than public school" because they are not, but the top ranking schools which are not selective tend to be private.

I agree with what nayyarv and lyounamu say. I go to a private school, and I can find faults with it, however I would never change schools. And no, we do not have an underground car park or tennis courts! We do however have teachers who are 100% commited to doing whatever it will take to make us do as well as possible in the HSC. I'm not gonna make huge generalisations, but compared to people I know in public schools, we have a lot more opportunities.

 

[michael1990]

Just found an article relating to this thread.

GOVERNMENT schools have beaten high-fee-charging private colleges in this year's HSC, winning top spot in a majority of the state's 38 education regions.
Public schools topped the HSC list in 22 regions across NSW but their success was even more pronounced in Sydney where they won 13 to the independents' three.
By region - how your school performed.
The Daily Telegraph's table of school performance is compiled from Board of Studies data on the results of more than 14,000 distinguished achievers who scored 90 or more in a HSC subject.
It shows public schools are holding their own in many areas, particularly in the city where the number of regions won by private colleges fell from five in 2006 to three this year.
But the results reveal the disparity in achievement between wealthy and poorer areas is as high as ever, with schools in Sydney's east and north blitzing the performance tables.
Among the shining lights of the government school system this year is Sarah Evans, 18, from St George Girls High School in Sydney's south - who came first in NSW for physical education.
"I really liked the content of the subject but there was no practical element," said Sarah who, as a keen runner, has competed in state cross-country titles.
Next year sport will take a back seat as she hopes to take a degree in commerce and law at the University of Sydney.
Low-fee Christian schools, a growth sector popping up around the city's fringes, also have led a charge up the rankings this year.
With just 18 HSC candidates, new school St Columba Anglican at Port Macquarie received nine listings on the Distinguished Achievers' table.
The Malek Fahd Islamic School, established with 87 students at Greenacre in 1989, easily topped the Bankstown region.
The school, which now has more than 1700 children from kindergarten to Year 12, is fast becoming an academic powerhouse to rival the state's top performers.
Results of the state's top students are the only detailed figures released by the Government, making a comprehensive comparison between schools impossible.
Education Minister John Della Bosca conceded that it was not the full picture of how all the state's students were performing.
". . . not all students who have performed strongly in this year's HSC appear on the merit lists," Mr Della Bosca said.
Jewish school Moriah College in Sydney's east took the honours in English while students from five different Catholic schools tied equal first in studies of religion.
PLC Sydney principal William McKeith said 67 per cent of his students achieved a band 6 result in at least one course.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22971280-5001021,00.html

 

[nayyarv]

yay some support

thanx midifile and foram

i noe i went way over topic, but lotta the posts were ripping on private schools, and i sorta felt i had to defend private schools. i was just trying to show that we arent wat the public perception is.

My sincerest apologies to ye, ccc123 (Post #75), of great education at the premier institute of cherrybrook. My poor humble, pro-private school argument was not upto the great standards that you expect at Cherrybrook. I never intended for my little post to capture the attention of one so great as you, ccc123. If I had known, I would have strived to impress, but yet my poor private school education would have failed me at a critical point, when i tried to use such words as 'elucidate' and 'insinuate' in my humble post. A lot of my points were indeed irrelevant, such as the brief and cringeworthy mention of the 'penis' game (boys school, wat do u expect). Oh great ccc123, the IB is considered harder by many educators, and the conversion of 45/45 to 99.95 is simply a political agenda. Nearly all humble private schools offer this midling qualification, not worthy of Cherrybrook and other premier educational institution of similar prestige such as Campbelltown boys (we private school children can only dream of such greatness). Due to the fees we pay, we are able to have access to ovals and tennis courts to enjoy baser sports that would never come near an institution such as Cherrybrook. Our team has a middling debating and chess team, teams that can not hope to stand in the same room as teams from your school.

ccc123
1) This is the internet, i dont care if the topic is on target or not, im just venting my spleen, and defending my school, something i have a right too
2) Im sorry if my argument failed to impress, thanks for deconstructing it so much,
3) Cherrybrook is a good public school, but private schools are different, and underground car parks and tennis courts are not how we are different, they are just stupid prejudices, like how i implied ur school sport was debating or chess
4) No 1 spells proply on da net, u can b the 1st
5) Some Public schools are also good, but u usually cant get into the best of them. Epping boys is always full, and u have to live in the area for a good school.
6) if private schools are so bad, why are there so many kids going to them
7) The IB is loads harder than the HSC, their Harder Maths is harder than 4u, they have to do a minimum of 20 novels for english, including novels transalated from other languages. I've seen it, it isnt easy. The IB is recognised worldwide, and is rated higher by unis than the HSC. I would do it, but it has a compulsary language other than english and i suck at languages
8) Private schools arent all that much different from public schools. Not every1 is rich and snobby (though we have those). Most kids coming to private schools have parents struggling to pay the fees. I should noe

Have fun analysing

 

[nayyarv]

Just found an article relating to this thread.

Results of the state's top students are the only detailed figures released by the Government, making a comprehensive comparison between schools impossible.

I should have added private schools perform better not at the top end but at the middle and bottom end. Thats the problem, no-one sees how the middle order went, just the top.

 

[Trajan]

Yeah but guys Cherrybrook Tech is in a league of it's own- as far as public non-selective schools go. I mean it may as well be private.


There are so many cats waiting and wanting to go to Cherrybrook. I'm pretty sure parents would be willing to pay so that their child could attend.

It's a magnate school...people are attracted to it like crazy- Faking addresses, using relatives' addies, just to attend.


It's located in a relatively affluent area so that explains some of it's appeal .
It's consistent strong performance in the HSC is also what makes it attractive.

 

[michael1990]

I should have added private schools perform better not at the top end but at the middle and bottom end. Thats the problem, no-one sees how the middle order went, just the top.

I agree to a point.

I mean i should of listened to my parents and went to a private school. But i was too stupid because i wanted to be with my friends.
But anyway, i think schools should try and be top in the middle and top in the top section. Not just have 1-2 people in the top spots of the state.

 

[ccc123]

yay some support

i noe i went way over topic, but lotta the posts were ripping on private schools, and i sorta felt i had to defend private schools. i was just trying to show that we arent wat the public perception is.

And I respect that. Btw, it seems I've come across as anti-private, which I'm not. I just think that in many cases, in terms of academic success, it comes down to the individual rather than the school.

My sincerest apologies to ye, ccc123 (Post #75), of great education at the premier institute of cherrybrook. My poor humble, pro-private school argument was not upto the great standards that you expect at Cherrybrook. I never intended for my little post to capture the attention of one so great as you, ccc123.

Well thanks for the grandstanding on my behalf

Oh great ccc123, the IB is considered harder by many educators, and the conversion of 45/45 to 99.95 is simply a political agenda.

Ok. My question then is why would you bother? It gives the impression that your academic standards are lower than they are (because the IB isn't recognised in the honour roll etc?) and in your estimation, is more difficult.
Your justification seems to be that the IB is basically more prestigious. Yet, I struggle to think of a uni, or even an international educational institution, that wouldn't recognise the HSC as a valid qualification.

3) Cherrybrook is a good public school, but private schools are different, and underground car parks and tennis courts are not how we are different, they are just stupid prejudices, like how i implied ur school sport was debating or chess

Ok, I admit I made a generalisation. But what other than superfluities does your school offer that is both:

a) essential for your "success in all facets of life"

and b) unheard of in public schools.

5) Some Public schools are also good, but u usually cant get into the best of them. Epping boys is always full, and u have to live in the area for a good school.

I agree that geography can in some cases be limiting, and sometimes, it may be necessary to pay the extra for a private school. Much of the time, however, it is snobbery that guides the decision.

6) if private schools are so bad
why are there so many kids going to them

1) I never said they were bad. Invariably, there are some poor private schools. However, there are also many poor public schools.

8) Private schools arent all that much different from public schools. Not every1 is rich and snobby (though we have those). Most kids coming to private schools have parents struggling to pay the fees. I should noe

This is exactly my point, so what are you arguing?