<p>Even though my son had to leave St. Mark’s at the end of 8th grade (long story and not due to academics), he did get an incredible foundation. He would have been class of '05. No place is perfect, and there were some very tragic situations during and after his years there involving some of his classmates as well as some peers from Hockaday. My son was well prepared for Penn, both from St. Mark’s and the wonderful boarding school he attended on the east coast for his last two years in high school. He did spend about 3 months at our local public school in Dallas, which was truly a complete waste of time. And this was a school where a lot of parents were very involved and committed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are more things that people do forget --or prefer to ignore–when comparing private and public schools. One being that the overwhelming majority of private schools operate at a fraction of the budget of public schools. Another that the argument of having to provide an education to “everyone” is often milked to death and blown out of proportion. </p>
<p>In the meantime, we’ll keep making excuses and … more excuses for underperformance and financial waste. The only good news is that the days of ever increasing budgets are coming to an end as taxpayers start to revolt and turn down new bonds. About time!</p>
<p>There are many reasons for underperformance, but one of the most important ones is lack of parental involvement. You cannot legislate parental involvement in public schools, and this puts publics at a huge disadvantage. I’m sorry if you are unhappy about your tax bill, but the publics have to fight battles the privates don’t, and those battles cost money. Again, if publics were able to pick and choose who their demographics were, I’m sure they could operate on the same budget as privates. Do you have any idea how much special services cost? Publics are mandated to provide education to all levels of capabilities, which includes the most minimally functional students who require one-on-one staff. They are huge resource drainers, but damn if I’m going to tell some parent their kid isn’t a valuable member of society and therefore doesn’t deserve an education. In our school district, when a student is deemed behaviorally inappropriate for regular attendance, parents have the right to choose whatever special program that is appropriate for that kid, and our district is responsible for paying all associated costs. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen airfare line-items in our school board’s budget to cover the cost of a parent going to see their child several states away. What about the kids whose health prevents them from attending school (perhaps they’re being treated for cancer)? The school has an obligation to provide home tutoring. It is expensive. Whenever there is an educational need that the main campus cannot handle (such as those I’ve suggested) and they have to send the student off campus, it costs money. I don’t see privates outsourcing their kids.</p>
<p>TW, while it is undeniable that the cost of special education is higher than the average, I believe that it would take a huge leap of faith to believe it does account for the … bulk of the increase in the past 30 years. Some states have reported that the cost of educating the K-12 students have increased by 300%, or even more than 450% in fewer than 30 years. In exchange for the substantial increases, taxpayers have only received an erosion in relative performance. </p>
<p>More examples? Michigan has reported that 83% of all public education spending goes to pay the salaries and benefits of employees. Of course, it’s important that good teachers be paid well, but 53% of Michigan’s public education employees never set foot in a classroom. As education spending has increased, the ratio of these nonteachers to teachers in Michigan schools has exploded by 75 percent.</p>
<p>In Texas, we’ve tripled real-per-student spending in less than 30 years, and built monuments to fiscal mismanagement with athletic and administration complexes rivaling college facilities. That is, we’ve tripled spending on top of enrollment growth and inflation! If we spent today, in today’s dollars on a per-student basis, what we spent in 1990, property taxes would be 40 percent less than they are today! </p>
<p>What have we received for all these programs, employees and spending in the state’s public education system? We have a lot more administrators, a lot more fancy buildings, and a lot more employees. We’ve given students new school buildings, computers, multi-media centers, fine arts centers, football stadiums, basketball arenas, and plenty of room to park their cars. We’ve given teachers broad contract rights, a duty-free lunch, an open class period every day, across-the-board pay raises, and fewer students in each classroom. Administrators are piled on administrators for the sake of administration. Where there once was one non-teaching person for every three teachers, we now have a one-to-one ratio. We have superintendents with multi-year contracts valued in the millions of dollars. </p>
<p>What we don’t have are better-educated kids. More spending in public education doesn’t give us more education. We spend more money, providing lots of frills, but very little of academic value. The state has seen some improvement in the elementary grades. But where it really counts, at high school graduation, we’ve had no improvement. We have a huge dropout problem in the higher grades. We spend more per student than virtually any developed nation in the world. And I doubt all of it can be attributed to the cost of special education!</p>
<p>However, I would gladly agree with you that parental involvement --not cash-- is the single most important factor in a child’s education. However, wouldn’t the best way to increase parental involvement be accomplished by giving parents a real voice in our education system and offering true school choice and school freedom?</p>
<p>‘rivaling college facilities’ is an understatement in our district xiggi.</p>
<p>Check out the facility where our high school kids play football, basketball, etc… </p>
<p><a href=“http://texascopperheads.com.ismmedia.com/ISM3/thumbcache/fcb366710310f46109a4b366a55180c1.300.jpg[/url]”>http://texascopperheads.com.ismmedia.com/ISM3/thumbcache/fcb366710310f46109a4b366a55180c1.300.jpg</a></p>
![http://texascopperheads.com.ismmedia.com/ISM3/thumbcache/fcb366710310f46109a4b366a55180c1.300.jpg[/url]](http://texascopperheads.com.ismmedia.com/ISM3/thumbcache/fcb366710310f46109a4b366a55180c1.300.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p><a href=“http://farm1.static.■■■■■■■■■■/101/301703443_6e553d9b32_o.jpg[/url]”>http://farm1.static.■■■■■■■■■■/101/301703443_6e553d9b32_o.jpg</a></p>
![http://farm1.static.■■■■■■■■■■/101/301703443_6e553d9b32_o.jpg[/url]](http://farm1.static.flickr.com/101/301703443_6e553d9b32_o.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p><a href=“http://farm2.static.■■■■■■■■■■/1341/998441951_4651e9ffa3_o.jpg[/url]”>http://farm2.static.■■■■■■■■■■/1341/998441951_4651e9ffa3_o.jpg</a></p>
![http://farm2.static.■■■■■■■■■■/1341/998441951_4651e9ffa3_o.jpg[/url]](http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1341/998441951_4651e9ffa3_o.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p>Our ‘other’ stadium…
<a href=“http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/texas/houston_pridgeon.jpg[/url]”>http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/texas/houston_pridgeon.jpg</a></p>
![http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/texas/houston_pridgeon.jpg[/url]](http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/texas/houston_pridgeon.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p>Xiggi, </p>
<p>There was an interesting article in the Economist (at least I read it recently…I have a backlog…
) that concluded that increased spending on education, and reduction in class size does not affect educational performance.</p>
<p>However, while I understand your assertion that most private schools spend less than most public schools, “most private schools” is not what has been discussed here. I doubt that a Tarrant County Christian Day should be compared to St Marks, and I doubt that was the intent of posters here.</p>
<p>teriwt fell into a classic logical trap in a statement about parental involvement. It is true that better schools are often characterized by high parental involvement. But that does NOT mean lack of parental involvement is a cause of poor schools (although it could be!). For example, if parental involvement led to good schools, then increasing parental involvement at a poor school should increase the quality. But there is no evidence that this happens. It may be more likely, to use one explanation, that another (unknown?) factor leads parents to choose better schools and also to be involved.</p>
<p>Ed research is tough to do well, and all too many published reports are garbage from a methodology point of view. That said, it has been very tough to find ANYTHING that affects student outcome in a consistent way, although the economist article talks at length about teacher quality and training. </p>
<p>Think of it this way: If the answer to improving our public schools were easy, we’d already know what works. But all we really know is what does not work - money, vouchers, charter schools, etc. etc. This is not an easy problem.</p>
<p>Since there are so many of us Dallasites (and me, the ex-Dallasite) here, I want to go on record here. Mark my words. The up and coming Dallas school is Parish Episcopal. While not as selective as some of the others, the overall ethics, parent support and teacher involvement is going to rival anything out there. It is going to turn out really good kids who are solid citizens. My kids went to pre-school there (although WildChild was kicked out at 4) and I’ve been involved in the school and church community for many years. It used to only go through 6th grade but just graduated its first senior class last May. You heard it here first!</p>
<p>let me clarify my suggestion because as I read it, it sounds as if I’m saying the parents need to be actively involved in the school (attending board meetings, volunteering, etc.). What I intended was parents who care about their child’s education, meaning, attending parent/teacher conferences, affirming good choices their children make when it comes to their education, encouraging them to get involved in ECs. Many households are two-income families - even the wealthier ones - and are just too tired when they get home to show an interest in what their kids did that day. The lower economic strata you enter, the more their focus centers on day-to-day survival, which then entails parents working two jobs.</p>
<p>I completely believe there are anecdotal stories of parents who work two jobs to put food on the table, yet have kids who excel academically beyond anyone’s expectations, but those are rare. What you can’t do is require parents to set aside their own issues, priorities, and struggles long enough to show more interest in their child’s education in ways other than attending board meetings and volunteering.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, NMD, you’re absolutely right, and I thank yo for setting the record correct. </p>
<p>I realize that the discussions about schools such as St Mark’s were related to some of the toniest schools in the city, state, or country. My intent was to illustrate that a debate between private versus public school has to transcend that overly simplistic definition. For every St Mark’s and its country club atmosphere, multi-million dolars athletic facilities, there is a small parochial school that survives on donations, tithing, and low tuitions. While St Mark’s, nestled among million dollar homes and trees, operates in an uber-wealthy area of Dallas, many of the “other” privates operate in impoverished downtowns and sea of graffiti covered concrete. In the same vein, how do we go about comparing high schools in Rye, Greenwich, San Marin to one in Camden, NJ, or many cities in the Deep South? </p>
<p>I also thank you for the mention of article in “The Economist.” This issue has been debated at great length in the past. Here are examples:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A good review of the past research is found at NCES site: [Selected</a> Papers in School Finance 1995 (NCES 97-536)](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/web/97536-2.asp]Selected”>Selected Papers in School Finance 1995 (NCES 97-536)) And a more recent one: [The</a> Class Size Debate](<a href=“http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/books_classsizedebate]The”>http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/books_classsizedebate)</p>
<p>As usual, one will have little problem finding a study that supports his or her (un)biased views. However, in the end, the issue of how much and how we should spend on education remains at the center of the debate–not to mention how the money should be raised. </p>
<p>As Margaret Thatcher’s quip goes, “**They **have the usual socialist disease; they have run out of other people’s money.” In this unfortunate case, “they” might very well be “our public education system” and a more simpler … US!</p>
<p>TW, again nobody will dispute the need for more parental involvement. The difficulty is to … get it. However, isn’t that also --yet another-- attempt to place the burden onto the shoulders of the parents and make excuses for a system that is unable to deliver the education one deserves? While it is undeniable that many pockets of problem exist in our country, the failure is far from being endemic. </p>
<p>Fwiw, there is a reason why our school system presents different performances. We are top in the world from K to middle school, way down the middle in middle school, and one of the lowest performing systems among industrialized nations for high school. That does correlate quite well with the potential and possibilities of parents to follow and contribute to their kids education. Once the parental help vanishes, so does the performance. What does that tell you about our “education” performance? Is there a doubt why people decide to homeschool, despite paying for a public education? Is there a doubt why people make huge sacrifices to send their kids to private schools despite paying for a public education? </p>
<p>While we can’t expect our educators to redress generations of social problems, we can expect them to make positive contributions at much greater speed and start to become … accountable! But that is a dirty word among the people who have been entrusted with our future. And, unfortunately, the victims are not only the students but the poor teachers who have been led to believe that it is THEIR system.</p>
<p>The private v. public school issue, is interesting to me. I am an energy industry professional, and I just dont know very many private educated children (or parents). As a result I tend to be someone who looks for answers in the public school arena. I know there are many advantages (and disadvantages) to privates… I dont have any axes to grind, just wanted to make a few observations, as I have read this ‘Texas’ discussion.</p>
<p>Our High School ( 2 years old in The Woodlands-north of Houston) has 19 NAtional Merit semi-fianlists and about 40 commends… out of 573 Seniors. The Woodlands HS had 9. I dont think this has much less to do with the school than it does with the population. </p>
<p>A public school is never going to have the same ’ test scoring advantages of the ‘elite’ privates… they dont get to select the top students, and leave the others to the ‘public’</p>
<p>Which leads me to the point I have some concern with. We seem to like the idea of having a diverse college experience, and understand the need to know people across the american spectrum, yet some of us want to limit these interactions at the high school level. </p>
<p>Public education is important. Even if you dont want your child there, educating the ‘people’ is necessary for our country success, and as a reult for all of us and our children. I am not a big advocate of the standardized ‘TAKS’ type test (I know they have a new name) but it does help suggest some basic knowledge that all the students need to know. I doubt many students, whose parents are on CC have any trouble with them and they shoudlnt</p>
<p>I would just encourage all of us (myself included) to spend some time working to improve the public system in Texas (and elsewhere) while we are seeking to get our kids to the right place</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is the right attitude to have! Especially for anyone who endorses the definition placed on “public” education by Milton Friedman. Since all schools are “public” we do make differences between governmental and private schools. So, yes, we should spend working to improve a public school system in Texas … one that uses public funding regardless of the religious or political affiliations of the schools that are part of the “system.” I believe that we have very examples where monopolies served the citizens better than a system based on open competition. There are studies that show that government schools do better when they are threatened to lose their monopoly. Unfortunately, our public school system in Texas does not fear anything, except the fear of losing its absolute grip and absolute funding. </p>
<p>If we REALLY want our public schools to improve, breaking up the monopoly will be necessary, as well as removing the abject control by the political organizations that masquerade as … labor unions. At the helm of our education system, we need people and organizations that have as SOLE objectives the improvement of the system and the betterment of the students, not the sole betterment of the “employees.” If a system purports to be “public” then it should serve the public, and not remain bastions of feudal power serving a few masters.</p>
<p>xiggi. Come and teach in my school for a week, and then talk to me about the educational system.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Our children’s academic education doesn’t end at 3PM when the bell rings. So much of what needs to be reinforced takes place after 3PM with homework. This is when parents have the opportunity to encourage and reinforce the energy and resources it takes to solidify what the student was exposed to during the day. </p>
<p>I will say that it was fairly rare for our kids to ever come to us for homework help, but in other ways we showed that we valued and respected the time and energy they put into their school work. It might have been as simple as the words we chose, or didn’t choose. Do you know how many kids are told by their parents they will never amount to anything because they struggle with a subject that the parent perceives as being easy. There are bitter parents whose own parents did not support their educational pursuits, think they turned out OK, and therefore think education is a waste of time, and will communicate this implicitly or explicitly. </p>
<p>When you enter the realm of private schools, you’ve already tackled the issue of parental investment. To just get to that level, you have parents who are more aware, more involved and have different values than some public student parents. </p>
<p>What I’m suggesting is that, if you look at the top students in any public school, you’ll most likely find behind them parents who have invested the same interest in their student’s education as their private school parent peers, but for whatever reason, chose public schools. In the segment of students where achievements are on the lower end, you often find either, students with learning and behavioral disabilities and/or students with parents who just don’t value education like the majority of us on this board. While teachers share the majority of responsibility for teaching material, I can’t think of any kids who I know, whose parents don’t also reinforce the value of education at home in direct or indirect ways. To expect teachers to do their job, and then expect high schoolers (or younger) to adapt adult values with no reinforcement whatsoever from home is unfair. The parents have to be involved. I’m sure I’m not the only one on this board who works with dysfunctional families whose lives revolve around crisis after crisis. Education just isn’t a top priority for everyone, and we can’t legislate that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Anxiousmom, I think you might be confusing me with John Stossel. </p>
<p>This said, I’d be happy to offer a rebuttal: spend one week analyzing the educational system as a STUDENT and then talk about the system. The unfortunate part of every discussion about the system is that any criticism is viewed as a mortal attack hurled at the … teachers. As I wrote many times, teachers are as much --if not more-- victims and hostages of a system that has grown out of control in the past decades.</p>
<p>[Texas</a> Public Policy Foundation - Commentaries](<a href=“http://www.texaspolicy.com/commentaries_single.php?report_id=1617]Texas”>http://www.texaspolicy.com/commentaries_single.php?report_id=1617)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As long as schools like St. Mark’s have alumni, faculty and friends who continue to fill the coffers, the disparity between an SM education and public education will remain vast. With an endowment now approaching $120 million even all the other privates will continue to be playing catch up and not have the ability, as SM does, to do nationwide searches to recruit the best faculty available,especially in math and the sciences, where finding top educators is difficult and always comes with a premium. In Texas, only Hockaday has a comparable endowment and since it is the sister all girl’s school to SM’s all boys it competes only for faculty, not students.</p>
<p>These are the latest announcements of overwhelming generosity to SM.</p>
<p>"School Announces Record Gift
9/28/2007
On Friday, September 28, 2007, St. Marks School of Texas announced a $1,000,000 endowment gift from long-time faculty member, Tom Adams, and his wife Marcy. Mr. Adams initially joined the St. Marks faculty in 1961 after graduating from Princeton University and has held the Cecil H. and Ida Green Master Teaching Chair in History since 1985. A 42 year veteran at the school, Tom also served as the third Faculty Senior Master from 1997-2002.</p>
<p>On the occasion of Mr. Adams 40th anniversary at St. Marks, former Board of Trustees President Allen Cullum 64 noted, Tom has immersed himself in St. Marks teaching American, World and Art History courses and coaching on the basketball court and the baseball field. For more than four decades, he has devoted his life to his students and colleagues.</p>
<p>Eugene McDermott Headmaster Arnold E. Holtberg went on to say, Tom and Marcy Adams’ generous gift is a powerful statement of commitment and loyalty. Since 1961, Tom has given of himself to our boys. An outstanding teacher and coach, he has poured himself into his work at St. Mark’s and into making boys better men. We are bowled over by Tom and Marcy’s magnanimity and most grateful for their extraordinary leadership. They have helped to shape our future.</p>
<p>The gift will establish a permanent endowment to enhance the schools available resources to attract and retain outstanding faculty. "</p>
<p>CENTENNIAL CHALLENGE ANNOUNCED
11/5/2007
On November 4, 2007, St. Marks School of Texas announced an anonymous donors record-breaking endowment gift of $10,000,000 to establish the Centennial Endowment Challenge. In one of the largest single endowment gifts made to an independent school in the United States, the donor will match all new gifts in support of the schools current building project with an equal gift to the schools permanent endowment, which today stands at just under $120,000,000.</p>
<p>Eugene McDermott Headmaster Arnie Holtberg, in his fifteenth year leading the school, commented, We are deeply grateful for this extraordinary gift to the schools endowment, a gift that will ensure our ability to achieve excellence well into the future. It will strengthen existing programs, add new ones, and support our talented faculty. Added Assistant Headmaster David Dini, This gift is an incredible affirmation of the schools core priorities and charts an aggressive course for our future.</p>
<p>St. Marks current building project includes two new academic buildings that are scheduled to open in the fall of 2008. Initiated by a lead gift of $10,000,000 from Kathy and Harlan Crow in the spring of 2006, Centennial Hall will serve as the schools core academic center and include high-tech classrooms for the Mathematics, English and History Departments. To honor the memory of alumnus and Life Trustee Robert K. Hoffman 65, Julie and Ken Hersh 81 committed $5,000,000 to launch The Robert K. Hoffman Center, which will house the Foreign Language Department, College Counseling, and the schools widely recognized Debate and Journalism programs.</p>
<p>Board of Trustees President Robert Sinclair 74 noted, St. Marks is a school with deeply rooted values and a firm commitment to continual improvement. We work to create an environment focused on character, values, striving, and achieving. The Centennial Endowment Challenge is about excellence, leadership, and genuine selflessness, and the benevolence that led to this gift will undoubtedly serve as an inspiration as we seek to strengthen education throughout the Dallas community.</p>
<p>I agree SM is “tony”-- marked by an elegant or exclusive manner or quality-- because it is and that comes from the active financial support of the alums, current student’s families and, as Tom Adams exemplifies, even the staff. It is no longer economically exclusive.</p>
<p>Examples? I worked 3 days a month for 4 years on the SM cafeteria line with a lady who is employed at SM as a kitchen worker and her husband is employed by SM in maintence. Their son attends SM and their daughter attends Hockaday. </p>
<p>There are students whose parents are frame carpenters and others are unemployed due to physical injuries. While my S was in attendance there were boys who rode the public transportation to SM from West Dallas. While attending a funeral of one student, I realized that some of the boys literally are from the ghetto. </p>
<p>Those parents who can pay the $20K a year (the tuition for my S as a senior in 2007) do and I cannot think of any money better spent, for my S and to help provide the education to the boys from meager economic circumstances whose families may pay nothing. FWIW, the boy from those circumstances got accepted and is attending Stanford, another has now finished at Howard.</p>
<p>What my sister-in-law, the Texas public school teacher, thought the most telling was (1) parental active involvment in their son’s schooling and (2) the single minded focus on each student excelling in all aspects: education, arts and sports. SM is not for many boys since the competition within the boys is very strong. But for those that relish the challenge, it provides EVER opportunity to achieve one’s personal potential.</p>
<p>There seems to be these same factors at work in Magnet schools, albeit without the mega-funding behind SM. But, Magnets are also selective and to me, therein lies the rub. How can the public system nurture the more able students and still produce functional graduates across the broad variation of economic and family factors present in Texas. That is the challenge.</p>
<p>OK, just going to throw something out for discussion - </p>
<p>Texas has one of the higher National Merit semifinalist cutoff scores (and the semifinalists are NOT all from St. Marks or other private schools). Does that indicate anything regarding the state of high school education in Texas?</p>
<p>07Dad</p>
<p>I could not agree with you more on all the issues addressed. The one thing that has impressed me the most in all the years we have been around SM is the continued drive to be truly more diverse and more inclusive. The amount of financial aid that is designated not only for low income families but also middle income families helps to avoid what has happened at other private schools like Greenhill.</p>
<p>For years Greenhill’s FA policy was all or none (full scholarship or nothing) and was used mainly to bring in students from South Dallas (unfortunately many were selected for athletic not academic prowess and did not fare well) and many middle income families were forced out. The diversity they bragged about for years was made up of a few low income African American students on full scholarship, but mostly minority children of well to do physicians and other professionals either African American, Asian or East Asian. There was VERY little socio-economic diversity to be found.</p>
<p>This has certainly not been the case at SM.</p>