<p>“with a few teachers who occasionally bring their personal perspectives into the classroom (and might be reprimanded, or at least endure a lot of eye-rolls from students) and one that has a a stated mission to indoctrinate students into specific religious tenets–all while benefiting from public tax dollars.”</p>
<p>Honestly my kids have had teachers in public schools that I believe their stated mission was to indoctrinate students into their religious and/or political views because it wasn’t an occasional occurrence. That said the kids have also had some very good teachers.</p>
My son’s school too, and senior year is all about social justice and giving back. Kids in good standing spend one day of the week working all day in a community-based group to serve the less fortunate.</p>
<p>Two of my kids went to NYC public schools. They can be every bit as bad as catahoula says. In my daughter’s school (which was very successful), there were at least two stabbings that I knew of, pervasive gang activity and countless arrests. Thankfully, the school did know how to handle things and not being a troublemaker, herself, my daughter never had a single problem.</p>
<p>My son’s middle school was a whole different story. It was in a much higher socio-economic area, but it was chaos on feet. Every dysfunction you can imagine. In the high performing honors program that did ninth grade academics a year early, one of the kids would regularly go to the bathroom and bring back feces with which he painted the walls and seats. It was an absolute zoo. But the teachers were amazing. In my opinion, middle school kids are more likely to be problematic and in this particular school, we called the principal the Wizard of Oz because no one had ever actually seen him. Whereas my daughter’s high school had a very strong, present, no nonsense principal.</p>
<p>I stole this from a thread on Parents Forum:</p>
<p>A Superintendent’s (from my neighboring district and one of the best in the region) message to her district on the testing scores just released. Kudos to her for speaking the truth. </p>
<p>I don’t agree with her assessment. I really don’t have a problem with the tests and when the students and teachers get familiar with them I actually think they will be beneficial. Or could be beneficial. I don’t think standardized testing is inherently a bad thing. I question the use of the scores in certain circumstances, but I don’t think they are necessarily harmful.</p>
You said it, Cromette! My sons’ Catholic school was full of non-Catholics who wanted the superior education and “snob appeal” of private school, but did nothing but complain about the Catholic aspects of the curriculum. I distinctly remember volunteering in the cafeteria one day with some non-Catholic moms who didn’t like the fact that our Grace After Meals, which the children recited before going out for noon recess, included prayers for the “souls of the faithful departed.” They said it was a downer to mention death to children. I held my tongue but my reaction was “Fine. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.” Another time, S2’s class did the readings, etc., at the weekly all-school Mass. One of the non-Catholic parents sat in a pew drinking coffee and reading the newspaper throughout the whole service! How disrespectful is that?
Look, I’m glad Catholic schools are more diverse than they were when I was a student, but at the end of the day, Catholic school is by, for and about us - our faith, our traditions and our beliefs - and passing them on to the next generation of the faithful. We love and welcome children of all faiths, but expect them and their parents to respect our faith and teachings. If you don’t like what we’re teaching, hold your nose and send your kids to public school.</p>
<p>I’m a non-Catholic whose kids all attended Catholic schools at one time or another. Two will (God willing) have graduated from Catholic schools. There have always been non-Catholics, including in the current child’s school, a large Muslim population and a moderate Jewish population in the other kid’s school. I’ve never seen disrespect for the religious teachings and practices. I would be horrified to witness that. I can’t imagine the thought processes. In my kids’ schools, we all fully participate as members of what are inclusive Catholic communities. Catholic. Communities. With priests, brothers, and deacons present in the schoole every single day. My son doesn’t receive communion but he attends all masses, receives ashes, has learned the prayers and takes his participation in religion class (which is a major subject) with the proper seriousness it deserves. He has benefited more than I can tell you from the Brother who was his religion teacher. I would be so sad and angry if people conducted themselves that way. I’m very sorry footballmom that your family had to deal with that nonsense.</p>
<p>I’m also a non Catholic parent whose kid went to a Catholic high school and where there were students of many faiths or secular and, like ZM, I never saw or heard of anyone acting in that manner. We knew going in my son would be required to take religion (considered a major subject taken all 4 yrs.) and attend the monthly required Mass. He was not required to participate but he had to sit there respectfully. The school was also cognizant that not all it’s students shared the faith. </p>
<p>ZM, is your son at a Christian Bros/LaSallian school? Mine was and your son’s sounds philosophically very similar to his.</p>
Yea ma’am, that’s exactly what it is. We are very happy in his case with the way religion is taught. The boys have to write a reflection once a week about various things like bullying and responsibility (you get the idea) in a way that forces them to really think deeply about whatever the topic is. For my son, this has been an incredible gift not only to his character, but to his writing skills, as well. He is a different person and is always cognizant of representing his school and doing things for other people. We all volunteer in our family, but for my son at 14, it was always “mom and dad make me,” but now in the context of school, he thinks about what he would like to do to help others as the special person he is, rather than being dragged by me. He has come to appreciate all the ways that a musician can share with other people and how good that feels. It’s not for everyone because it is academically very rigorous and they accept absolutely no excuses for anything, but my son needs that.</p>
<p>^ I thought so from what you have written about it previously. </p>
<p>We couldn’t have been more pleased with the education our son received and how well it prepared him for the rigors of high school. No amount of screaming, nagging or bribing got my kid to get off his schneid in public school, but after one week at his private school (we pulled him from the public 5 weeks into 9th grade) and he was a changed kid. </p>
<p>I only wish I had sent him in 6th grade. Middle school was a horror.</p>
<p>Consolation, YW. </p>
<p>I had to go read what the super of my district said after I read it but was sorely disappointed. He obviously bought the talking points (after bragging that though our scores all went down we stilled scored significantly higher than everyone else.) Like that has nothing to do with the fact there is virtually zero poverty in this district - we are just so much better at teaching then anyone else.</p>
<p>So, even in Pacific Palisades, maybe there are reasons to select private? </p>
<p>And, you’re noting one difference in schools run by orders, versus a local parochial. Same experience here. And, no matter what one’s family religion is, some exposure to the notions can be good.</p>
<p>But, big difference when speaking of NY state, New England or any generally more liberal area- and some other parts of the country.</p>
<p>I am also a non-Catholic who attended Catholic schools (elementary and high)—the schools would be getting big checks from me. In high school (boarding), we were required to go to mass once a week and meet one hour on Saturday to rehearse the songs for Sunday mass. There was also a compulsory 3 day retreat every term; we were not required to participate in all the catholic services, but were required to show up. The order in charge of the school believed that, not only should we pursue a life of the mind; we should also pursue a life of the spirit. </p>
<p>I understood that the schools were there for Catholics and I was fortunate to be accepted. I received a quality education; curriculum went beyond what accreditation mandated. My high school really opened my mind and opened a lot of doors for me. I would forever be grateful.</p>
Emily and I are both in New York. I totally support private education. I just don’t want taxpayers to pay for it. </p>
<p>I also don’t think taxpayers should pay for private special education, either, except in incredibly extreme cases of physical needs that have to be met in special settings. Otherwise, at least here, the system is so huge that there are always more than one kid in most situations. I think the system should have to appropriately accommodate the student’s needs within the system. There are certainly kids whose needs are severe and legitimate, but paying for private schools with public funding is too often abused.</p>
<p>“Otherwise, at least here, the system is so huge that there are always more than one kid in most situations.”</p>
<p>But not everywhere is NYC and many districts in NY are very small. </p>
<p>I have a friend whose son was hit by a car and severely brain damaged, but our district has a program for children in these types of circumstances and I believe they even remain in the program until age 21. But my district is wealthy and can afford it.</p>
<p>I know and I’m in NE. I was referring to the parts of the thread about areas where some may have legit concerns a religious school (in general) may be about “indoctrination.” We were very satisfied with our kids’ experience in a lower school, run by an order; it influenced them in many “right” ways. </p>
<p>Could we come up with other areas where taxpayers get to say–well, give me some of my money paid in taxes back because I opt to not use/don’t approve of government service _______?</p>
<p>Isn’t private school simply such an “opt out” situation.</p>
It’s not a question of money versus no money. It’s very expensive to pay for private school. Why not use the same funds within the system (because it has to be paid for anyway) and make sure that procedures are in place for future kids? Again, in very extreme cases of physical needs, fine, but otherwise I have a problem. Not with funding. Not that at all. But with using taxpayer dollars to pay for private schools.</p>