Public vs Private Schools

It is not. Remember that public schools (they are essentially free for the parents) are competing with private schools that are charging 20k+ per year per pupil. Most people who have to work for a living will not shell out 20k+ or (50-60k if there are siblings involved) simply because they are classist: they see clear advantages in private schools.This year, most bay area public schools are online. Many private schools are still operating in person. For young children, this makes a world of d

You seem to be falsely equating private schools with "the wealthy" and public schools with "the working class". Plenty of people are wealthy and send their kids to public schools. They fund them via property taxes rather than tuition payments.

In most major cities, affluent parents opt-out of the public schooling system and we end up with underfunded and failing schools.I'm consistently attracted to a system a la Finland: for K-12, tuition and selective admission are strictly prohibited[0].I worry that this may seem to extreme to put into action, but it wouldn't be. Even Warren Buffet has pushed for banning private schools, and soon.[1]Any thoughts on why this may not be a good idea?[0] <a href="https://

what about the (vast majority) school districts that spend less than private schools?

That's not how the real world works, only an idealized one. And not all public or private schools are the same. In the US, private schools were motivated (but not forced) to adopt better approaches because they were often competing with widely-available free public schools. Some public schools were being ruined by inept education bureaucrats, so wealthier parents moved their kids into better private ones. This is because some states and school districts were overriding the wishes of the par

The people underfunding our schools had their private schooling paid for by virtue of being unconscionably wealthy.The more you realise what has happened the more maddeningly upset you will get, so it's best not to think about it.Sufficed to say: you're wrong, additionally: dead wrong and it's not relevant for a topic about databases.

public schools do not exist in a market. what private schools do is their business, the issue here is that they are spending your money on what amounts to a hole in the ground benefits wise.

I don't understand why the article makes it sound like a problem that enrollment is tied to funding. If funding is going down because enrollment is down that's not sad. Similarly, if people are increasingly favoring private institutions the question shouldn't be how to win them back but rather how to emulate institutions that they found more acceptable. Personally, neither of my two children have been to a public school in a long time and I can't imagine ever wanting to send

That seems quite bad. It's a graphic example of how when it comes to public schools, or public policy in general, things get dumbed down to the lowest common denominator in the interest of "fairness" regardless of how unfair it is for those who are ready and able to do more. I don't know how that would get fixed, other than, as you said, moving to private. When you are paying directly (versus indirectly via taxation) you can demand a lot more.

I mean your child gets an education either way, its do you get top 5% private school or public school? You can't give everyone free access to a top private school, or it is no longer a top by definition ;)