🚀 go-pugleaf

>>The parochial schools produce better educated children than do the
>>public schools -- generally without resorting to expensive schemes like
>>paying children for learning.  Moreover, they do so at a lower cost per
>>student.  In other words, the parochial schools provide better education
>>for less money.
> 
  No doubt!!  The parochial schools teach the children who have parents who
  are most interested in education.  With better social conditions at home to
  promote learning, there are simply better students at private schools.
  Under a school choice system, the best schools will skim off the best
  child/parents.  These schools, of course, will be able to charge more too.
  Compare the tuition in the lower grades at the University School (~$5000)
  with those of another private school that does not have such a positive
  track record . . . The Woodland's School (~$2,500).

   Marshall

I totally agree. The mythical success of private schools is the result
of WHO goes there, not what happens to them once they get there. 
If you want an accurate picture of the challenges facing public education
today, and the pitiful resourses that are allocated to meet that challenge,
I suggest reading Jonathan Kozol's Savage Inequalities. You also might want
to look at the Milwaukee Journal article from 3 months ago that showed the
comparative per capita spending of various city schools. Schools in better
neighborhoods spend up to 3 and 4 times per pupil than those in the inner
city. The constant rhetoric of blame--"it's the kids or families fault that
they're not getting an education"--is simply a way to ignore a problem that
we all bear some responsibility for.

Paul Kosidowski
Modern Studies
Univ of Wisconsin Milwaukee.