I agree @calmom. I was uncertain about the definition of critical thinking, and now posters add layers of uncertainty to it, far more complicated than I thought. The “if/how” part could be more complicated. I can now say to myself that thinking private schools teach better in critical thinking is lack of critical thinking. But I’m glad I asked the question.
The proliferation of teachers & professors who test by Scantron is not helping. Most kids are being raised to fill in little circles, not think critically.
@jonri I thought Speech&Debate was one thing but there are many subcategories. What “forms of speech” help CT?
Regarding to too many standardized tests I agree with posters who think they do more harm than good.
Yes, it really depends on both the private and public schools and how they teach. In many good publics, the kids do well enough on the standardized tests that the teachers do not in any way teach to the test. For some APs, however, it is true that there is “teaching to the test” but as someone pointed out above, the AP tests are not all fill in the bubble and require critical thinking to do well. Also, high schools prepare top students for SAT subject tests, which do include “fill in the bubble” fact-based answers.
Compare and contrast the students you see at both schools, the curriculum and the college placement. What are the extra-curriculars like? In our area, some of the privates are great but others lack the diversity of courses and activities of the public high schools. Some privates are also very competitive and would not be good for more laid back kids. But the top prep schools definitely have a higher rate of elite school acceptances than even the best publics. Look at your student’s goals, interest, and personality and go from there.
IMO, extemp(oraneous) speech is probably the best for CT. It often has two divisions: foreign and domestic. Declamation and duo interp are worthwhile activities but don’t develop CT skills. http://www.write-out-loud.com/declamation-speech.html
I think that there probably are public schools that teach some critical thinking, but it is most likely not to the extent that the private schools are able to accomplish it because they must spend an inordinate amount of time teaching facts and core curriculum. Private school students are given more time to analyze and discuss deeper meanings of the material being taught, rather than wasting time memorizing facts for a standardized test. By design, private schools are free to explore subjects in more depth and in more creative ways and allow the students to learn in a more holistic process.
Megan, there are a lot of terrible private schools out there. Some were founded in response to integration. Some are there so affluent kids don’t have to share a desk with poor kids. Some are there to provide better athletic opportunities and play in elite sports leagues but have mediocre academics.
Yes, there are dumb rich kids and there are a lot of schools catering to them. The idea that all private schools are teaching in a “holistic fashion” isn’t borne out by reality. Some of them are teaching an expensive version of remedial education.
Why would you send your child to a terrible private school? If you’re going to shell out that much money, wouldn’t you send them to a school with a good reputation?
I was speaking about good private schools with excellent academics, obviously.
“Question Authority” is one aspect of critical thinking. This means being skeptical – but not cynical – about the “accepted wisdom.” We raised our kids this way. They went to public schools – until college. As my dad used to say about me, I “think about things.” Critical thinking is a habit of mind, asking how things work, why they work as they do, what really happened behind the headlines, could the outcome have been different or better, and so forth.
Can it be taught? I think so, but this depends as much on one’s upbringing and turn of mind as it does on teachers and schooling. That said, I think critical thinking is closely connected to critical reading, writing, and “argument” – to asking why things work as they do, not just how. This is also why I favor strong writing programs in schools at all levels. For sure some things must be learned by rote. But the turn of mind that asks “why,” and “could this have been different,” and “who is benefiting or losing out” – those are illustrations of “critical thinking.”
Megan, I have neighbors who pay full freight for a sub par private school which has excellent sports/athletics. They believe their “ROI” will be in the form of athletic scholarships for their kids. Time will tell. They did not want their kids in the local public middle school (diverse city- economically, racially, many languages spoken) and don’t have the expertise to home school. Kids don’t seem to be particularly ambitious academically so maybe it’s all good. Not how I would have played this hand but these are not my kids and it is not my money.
In my area, where the public schools are large and the private schools are small, some parents of athletic kids send their kids to private schools even if the private school is not better academically because they know that with the smaller school population, the kid will get to play on the varsity team.
In the large public schools, kids have to be to be extraordinarily talented in their sport to be able to play for their school because there are so many kids and so few spots on the team. The possibility of athletic scholarships may enter into this thinking (because a kid who is not on the varsity is definitely not going to get one), but I don’t think it’s the only factor.
Even if you go to one of the very best prep schools, not all students are created equal. Not all, eg, automatically end up at tippy top colleges. Their GCs find the right fit.
It’s not just the environment or cost, core curric or not. The student has to absorb the opportunity, wherever it’s offered.
In comparing admission rates to tippy top colleges from private and public schools, you need to discount “hooked” candidates IF your child won’t have that hook.
For example, some of the best private schools in the Boston area have many students who are the children of MIT and Harvard profs. If you are qualified academically, being a fac brat is one of the most significant hooks you can have. But if your child is NOT the child of a faculty member, comparing the rate of admission for such private schools to public ones–which usually don’t have as many faculty brats–can be very misleading.
Another hook is being a recruited athlete. The boarding schools and top private schools offer sports like water polo, squash, field hockey, lacrosse, rugby, fencing, golf, etc. that few public schools offer. If your child is capable of being a recruited athlete in one of these sports, it may make sense to go to a school that excels in these sports where (s)he will get excellent coaching and a shot at being a recruited athlete in one of these sports. But if your child is a klutz, his/her chances of admission from a public school may not be any worse.
Then there are developmental/celebrity admits. By developmental, I mean people who can give big bucks. More of their children attend private than public schools. Ditto for celebrities.
Finally, there are legacies. While being a legacy isn’t as good a hook as any of those listed above, it still improves your chances of admission. If your child is NOT a legacy, take the number of private school kids who were admitted to top colleges AND are legacies into account.
Interesting example to use, since, except for the “public k-12” part, it sounds much like the founder of Theranos (Elizabeth Holmes), who was the youngest self-made female billionaire in the US. She unfortunately found herself under investigation by the SEC and a US criminal investigation/probe, and she was banned by CMS from lab testing for 2 years. Sadly, the once high-flying company has floundered, and the valuation dropped severely, with the investors holding the preferred stock shares, making her shares essentially worthless. No more billionaire. https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2016/06/01/from-4-5-billion-to-nothing-forbes-revises-estimated-net-worth-of-theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes/#3e0a46223633
Not saying she isn’t very bright, but there seems to have been a lapse in some critical thinking somewhere. Oh, and she attended St. John’s School in Houston, a private, independent school. Then dropped out of Stanford to start Theranos. Very interesting rise and fall.
Also, not all students from such prep schools admitted to Ivy/elite prep colleges or equivalents overseas(i.e. Oxbridge) necessarily have good CT skills.
One good case in point, the Barings Bank Scandal in the mid-'90s in which a long-established prestigious British banking institution headed by and ran largely by Oxbridge/peer elite college graduates ended up being hoodwinked into bankruptcy with a loss of $1.4 billion dollars by Nick Leeson…someone who only had a HS diploma from a ““partially selective” British comprehensive HS*”.
- Equivalent to a good partially selective** US public high school.
** They accepted siblings without regard to academic record/performance up until recent times.
Critical thinking is a higher order skill and requires both innate ability and will. Some people lack the intellectual capacity for it; they simply cannot easily select relevant information, synthesize ideas, or draw logical conclusions. Others lack the willingness to expend the effort required to think deeply, or else refuse to suffer the discomfort of doing so. They prefer the easy way of accepting conventional ideas and mindlessly following the other lazy-brained sheep. Some people lack both the intelligence and the energy for CT. Personally, I think the type of school has little to do with it.
I think a better way of framing the question is simply, “how do good teachers encourage critical thinking skills in their students?”
Because I would agree with you that critical thinking is important, and that the best teachers will help their students develop their skills. I just think that good teachers - and mediocre/bad – are to be found in all environments, public and private, though the overall philosophy of the school, the degree of support the teachers get from their administration, and the demographics which influence caliber of student body are all important factors that impact the motivation and ability of the teachers to focus on critical thinking.
In many areas, public school teachers receive higher pay and benefits than private school teachers, and in private schools may also employ non-credentialed teachers. My son’s public high school chemistry teacher had a Ph.D. My daughter had a high school biology teacher who also worked as an adjunct professor teaching college biology at the local state u. So especially at the high school level, public schools often have very well qualified teachers with high expectations on their staffs.
Better credentialing and educational preparation of teachers may improve the odds of the teacher being able to both think critically himself and encourage critical thinking in his students. However, training and degrees are certainly not sufficient without a commitment to that type of mental discipline. Major impediments to CT are emotionalism, dogged adherence to a particular world view, and the psychological need to rationalize one’s own choices. When capable and intelligent people eschew CT, it is often because they suspect in-depth research, analytical thought, and a simple acknowledgment of certain objective facts could lead them to a conclusion they don’t much like, which in turn may demand an action they don’t want to take.
@jonri, @wisteria100, and @toowonderful all gave good answers. Teachers need to require more than memorization, although that’s important to build a foundation of knowledge. Students should be expected to read, analyze, synthesize, and write coherent essays. In the history context, you shouldn’t give the students a history book filled with lies and alternative facts. You should expose them to alternative perspectives, but not to a fictitious rewriting of history. Authors, who use every event to cudgel you over the head with the same moral point, might be better suited to a philosophy or political science course than a history course. Some of these responses seem odd to me. If you’re not Catholic or at least Christian, why would you go to a Catholic school?
Perceived quality is what draws students of all religions to private schools. Jesuit schools in particularly have a long and well-deserved reputation for their high educational caliber, and it is very common for students of all religions to want to attend Jesuit high schools (as well as Jesuit colleges). It’s estimated that 5-10% of students at San Francisco Bay Area Catholic high schools are Jewish. (Source - http://www.jweekly.com/2004/12/20/cover-story-br-good-heavens/) I’m sure the same would be true in other communities.