Sorry i posted this in the wrong thread....

Gold Medal Schools

Posted November 29, 2007

 

Walnut Hills High School  (Top 100, #83)

Cincinnati Public Schools School District

Hamilton County

 

3250 Victory Parkway

Cincinnati, Ohio

(513)569-5500

 

I just wanted to brag a bit :-D

...One thing is for sure my kids will never step foot as a student in a CPS School.

 

As for the second part, I am a Walnut Hills grad so I take some exception to that but I understand your point in general.

 

I guess you enjoy wasting your money.  I'd ask you for some spare cash, since you don't seem to need it, but then again, giving it to me wouldn't be a waste, so it's probably not your bag.

 

I'm inclined to dismiss your opinion out of hand, Maximillian, but I'll ask you what exactly are your reasons for opposing sending your kids to a Cincinnati Public School?  Also, Redmond, I think you've got it backwards.  I'm a Walnut Hills grad as well, but it strikes me that a conscientious parent would be more justified in sending their kid to a CPS grade school and then switching to a private high school (although it still strikes me as a massive waste of money).  There are far more quality elementary schools in the district than high schools.

^When choosing schools, we had many many choices.  We visited Sands, Dater, Fairview German and Schiel (sp?). And there are lots of other magnet programs; those are just the ones we looked at.  All of them had excellent programs and teachers, and to top it off they are all free.  If you want to go to a private, parochial or charter school, consider this: their teachers get paid much less.  IMO 90% of the reason people go private is to upgrade to better classmates.  The other 10% could be religious reasons, dress code etc. 

If you want to go to a private, parochial or charter school, consider this: their teachers get paid much less.  IMO 90% of the reason people go private is to upgrade to better classmates.  The other 10% could be religious reasons, dress code etc. 

 

And yet they choose to work for less, because they believe that something about the private experience is beneficial and worthwhile for the students. 

 

 

I guess you enjoy wasting your money.  I'd ask you for some spare cash, since you don't seem to need it, but then again, giving it to me wouldn't be a waste, so it's probably not your bag.

 

As someone who went to Catholic school for 12 years, I wouldn't hesitate to send my own children there, and would be in a serious quandry if I found that I could not afford to do so.  I'm not particularly religious, but I think that the high quality education and stricter environment are valuable for the students. 

 

Send your kids wherever you want, but don't start ragging on private schools just because you choose not to use them.

Send your kids wherever you want, but don't start ragging on private schools just because you choose not to use them.

 

I agree wholeheartedly; that was an ingnorant statement.  I do not have kids yet, but when I do, if I believe sending them to a private school is in their best interest I will never consider spending money on their education a "waste of money".

^I can give two examples of wasting money on education.  One, my own college career.  I went to the University of Cincinnati for my freshman year, then transferred to Georgetown University and finished college there.  While I had great teachers, good friends, and learned a lot, there was absolutely nothing there that I couldn't have learned at UC.  Success in education is far more about what the individual puts into it themselves than anything else.  But how does one tell how seriously one's child is going to take their own education?  This brings me to my second point.

 

A friend of mine had a little boy and she was telling me about where she and her husband were thinking of sending her son to grade school.  She attended Mercy Montessori for grade school, went on to Walnut Hills for high school, then went to Columbia for college and UC for med school.  She was considering sending her son to Mercy.  I told her, "You know, you are a doctor.  Your father and mother are doctors.  Your husband is a doctor.  Your little brother is in medical school [and he recently married a fellow med student].  The most important people in this kids life are all doctors.  I think it's a pretty safe bet he's going to be disciplined at school and take it seriously.  Why not send him to Sands Montessori or North Avondale Montessori and save yourself some cash?"

 

I think that private schools are all about, "upgrading classmates" as Jskinner put it, and that therefore it is generally not worth it (particularly for the type of folks who I assume are posting on this forum).  Education is a commodity, just like most things you by, and since you don't have unlimited resources, of course are putting a price on your kids education.  If you didn't you'd be an irresponsible parent. You could higher a private tutor, thereby reducing distractions from other kids to zero and perhaps even putting him or her directly on a path to success.  Why not spring for it all- personal scribe, luge lessons?  I don't think my statement was either ignorant nor ingnorant, at least not for those of us who have had experience in paying for their own education.

And yet they choose to work for less, because they believe that something about the private experience is beneficial and worthwhile for the students. 

Or possibly they didn't have the qualifications to get a public school job?  Or possibly they don't want to deal with the difficult students that CPS may give them?  Teachers don't always choose their job for altruistic purposes.  I mean they have to eat too.

 

I am not speaking from ignorance here.  I attended parochial schools and know their strengths as well as their weaknesses, and I know several teachers in both sectors today. 

And yet they choose to work for less, because they believe that something about the private experience is beneficial and worthwhile for the students. 

Or possibly they didn't have the qualifications to get a public school job?  Or possibly they don't want to deal with the difficult students that CPS may give them?  Teachers don't always choose their job for altruistic purposes.  I mean they have to eat too.

 

All valid points.  But I just don't factor the teachers' pay scale into my choice of schools.  There are many positive and negative factors that would lead a teacher to either private or public schools, money being just one of them.  It's not really worth going through every possibility.

 

 

^I can give two examples of wasting money on education.  One, my own college career.  I went to the University of Cincinnati for my freshman year, then transferred to Georgetown University and finished college there.  While I had great teachers, good friends, and learned a lot, there was absolutely nothing there that I couldn't have learned at UC.  Success in education is far more about what the individual puts into it themselves than anything else.  But how does one tell how seriously one's child is going to take their own education?  This brings me to my second point.

 

We aren't talking about colleges and universities, though.  We're talking about where children spend their formative years.  I happen to believe that private schools offer more structure than most public schools, and that structure is valuable for children as they develop.  If you don't, that's fine, but nothing you've said invalidates that point.

 

A friend of mine had a little boy and she was telling me about where she and her husband were thinking of sending her son to grade school.  She attended Mercy Montessori for grade school, went on to Walnut Hills for high school, then went to Columbia for college and UC for med school.  She was considering sending her son to Mercy.  I told her, "You know, you are a doctor.  Your father and mother are doctors.  Your husband is a doctor.  Your little brother is in medical school [and he recently married a fellow med student].  The most important people in this kids life are all doctors.  I think it's a pretty safe bet he's going to be disciplined at school and take it seriously.  Why not send him to Sands Montessori or North Avondale Montessori and save yourself some cash?"

 

I don't know anything about Mercy, Sands, or North Avondale Montessori, but if she enjoyed attending Mercy and felt that it prepared her well for high school and beyond, then I can can totally understand why she would consider giving her children the same experience that she had.

 

 

I think that private schools are all about, "upgrading classmates" as Jskinner put it, and that therefore it is generally not worth it (particularly for the type of folks who I assume are posting on this forum).  Education is a commodity, just like most things you by, and since you don't have unlimited resources, of course are putting a price on your kids education.  If you didn't you'd be an irresponsible parent. You could higher a private tutor, thereby reducing distractions from other kids to zero and perhaps even putting him or her directly on a path to success.  Why not spring for it all- personal scribe, luge lessons?  I don't think my statement was either ignorant nor ingnorant, at least not for those of us who have had experience in paying for their own education.

 

It's hilarious that you're making fun of PRidgeFlyer for what was obviously a typo, when you used "higher" instead of "hire" only two sentences prior to that.

 

I'm not saying that you can't get a good education from a public school.  I just know from experience that there is value in a private school system.  No one is labeling you as a bad parent if you don't choose to send your children to private school.  I'm only pointing out that it's a valid option and isn't a "massive waste of money", as you put it.

"But I just don't factor the teachers' pay scale into my choice of schools."

Well I definitely think it is important.  You generally get a better educated teacher, plus I would feel guilty sending my kid to a school when I know the teacher is having a hard time making ends meet.

 

"high quality education and stricter environment are valuable for the students"

CPS can and does offer this. 

 

If you are not going parochial for religious reasons, I still contend the main reason to choose private is to upgrade the classmates.

"But I just don't factor the teachers' pay scale into my choice of schools."

Well I definitely think it is important.  You generally get a better educated teacher, plus I would feel guilty sending my kid to a school when I know the teacher is having a hard time making ends meet.

 

A difference in quality between teachers' own educations would be difficult to support or deny with facts.  I personally think that you're incorrect in assuming that private schools have teachers who just aren't good enough to teach in public schools, but I have no data one way or the other.  As for the guilt factor, teachers are not forced to work in private schools.  They choose to do so.  Do you think that private schools should not exist, simply because their lack of public funding translates into lower salaries for their employees?  You're also making a huge assumption there, that all of the teachers need the money, without any knowledge of their backgrounds and/or spouses' occupations.

 

 

"high quality education and stricter environment are valuable for the students"

CPS can and does offer this. 

 

I never said you can't get a good education in a public school.  As for the the stricter environment, that's debatable.  Public schools, on the whole, are less strict than private schools.  Or at least they certainly seem to be, and I believe that's also the generally accepted perception.  I'm not a teacher and am no expert on this subject, obviously.

 

 

If you are not going parochial for religious reasons, I still contend the main reason to choose private is to upgrade the classmates.

 

I'm sure that's part of some people's decision making, but there are certainly a variety of other factors they are considering as well.  If parents are willing to pay for their children to receive an education that, for one reason or another, they consider to be superior, AND teachers are willing to work for less money to provide that education, then I don't see what the problem is.  Those same parents still have to pay taxes like everyone else to educate the community's children in public schools, and they don't get a voucher or something for "opting out".  If they choose not use the public school system, that's their right to do so.

I need some clarification here, I may have missed something.....

 

."..One thing is for sure my kids will never step foot as a student in a CPS School."

"I am a Walnut Hills grad so I take some exception to that but I understand your point in general."

 

Redmond, I think you've got it backwards.  I'm a Walnut Hills grad as well, but it strikes me that a conscientious parent would be more justified in sending their kid to a CPS grade school and then switching to a private high school (although it still strikes me as a massive waste of money).  There are far more quality elementary schools in the district than high schools.

 

I do not believe we are saying anything different with the exception of Walnut Hills High School.  Or am I still missing something? 

I don't understand why this is such an issue. Good private schools surround high achieving kids with other high achieving kids, good facilities, good teachers, more attention from college counselors, more connections to colleges, and good opportunities to experience things that aren't able to be experienced in public high schools.  Now, good public schools also have their set of advantages: generally more diverse (at least economically), usually closer and more community driven, high number of course options (I think Walnut Hills offers the most AP classes of any school in the state), and they're free.  If people have the money, and want to spend it on a private education, they are buying a set of advantages for their child, but at the same time, losing some advantages from public school.  It's really just a personal preference that should be decided by the family.  Also, the talk about where to go to school shouldn't be all about numbers.  Schools create a sense of community among families, and it is important to go somewhere where the child and the family both feel comfortable.

Well, there are 2 or 3 other good CPS High Schools.  Walnut Hills is not the only option.

 

My son's CPS education (so far) is a notch above my own parochial education.  My parents admit that they sent me to parochial school mostly to get away from the trashy kids at the local public school.  My opinion probably matched JimmyJame's until I started researching schools for my own kids.  If the parochial school has lower student-teacher ratio or better computers, or has better facitilies, or has more teachers with advanced degrees or had more language or music classes than CPS, then by all means, go parochial.  But they generally don't.  And really, the discipline is similar, it is the wealth of the families that attend that makes the major difference.

What are the other good CPS high schools that could compete with St. X, Ursula/line, Summit, CCD, Seven Hills, etc.  Surely Walnut is every bit as good a school as those, but which others?

Hughes has good academics; I have friends who went there. They let you sort of "major" in things like zoology, bio-medical, communications etc and give you hands on experience. However there's still a lot of fights and teachers have to take on the role of parents; the case with almost every other CPS school. SCPA is almost on par with Walnut but you other CPS schools don't have the strong alumni support that Walnut has, which makes a HUGE difference.

Well, Clark and Withrow University received honorable mentions in that US News report. Taft is much improved as well.

 

CPS just won't be able to compete with private schools in some areas, though. Like St X in football or Summit in recreational drug abuse.

 

 

 

Take it easy, that's a joke.

 

 

^That's great!  LOL

"st x has a strong recreational drug use team, but better legal counsel than most cps students"

Well, Clark and Withrow University received honorable mentions in that US News report. Taft is much improved as well.

 

CPS just won't be able to compete with private schools in some areas, though. Like St X in football or Summit in recreational drug abuse.

 

 

 

Take it easy, that's a joke.

 

 

 

I totally forgot about Clark.  That is a great school and for sure can hold its own with the private ones.

 

 

and yeah, CPS schools can't compete with Summit and St. X in recreational drug use...they're too busy selling the drugs (joke) :lol:

What are the other good CPS high schools that could compete with St. X, Ursula/line, Summit, CCD, Seven Hills, etc.  Surely Walnut is every bit as good a school as those, but which others?

I was thinking of Clark Montessori HS and SCPA.  And instead of comparing to Summit and Seven Hills, you could compare them to Bacon, Elder, Purcell, LaSalle.

It's hilarious that you're making fun of PRidgeFlyer for what was obviously a typo, when you used "higher" instead of "hire" only two sentences prior to that.

 

That is pretty funny.  I think that's a legitimate case of irony.

 

I'm sure that's part of some people's decision making, but there are certainly a variety of other factors they are considering as well.  If parents are willing to pay for their children to receive an education that, for one reason or another, they consider to be superior, AND teachers are willing to work for less money to provide that education, then I don't see what the problem is.  Those same parents still have to pay taxes like everyone else to educate the community's children in public schools, and they don't get a voucher or something for "opting out".  If they choose not use the public school system, that's their right to do so.

 

Nobody's talking about rights.  My only point is that just because you purchase something that is more expensive and more exclusive doesn't mean it will function better to it's competitor (I learned that the hard way when I bought that damn Mac PowerBook).  Education is a good much like any other.  It is considered important enough that the government subsidies it.  Some people want to pay extra for it for various reasons.

 

A comment was made to the effect that the Cincinnati Public Schools lack quality.  I argued that the product put out by the Cincinnati Public Schools was equal to that of any private elementary or high school education offered in the area.  The same subjects are taught at all school systems, and as Jskinner said, the public schools pay more for to teachers in terms of salaries and benefits than the private schools do, so from a general economic standpoint, they would get the best teachers.  Since CPS offers the same product with better service and at a cheaper price, I posit that private education is a waste of the average persons money, or that it perhaps exists in a market similar to other luxury goods (I suppose that the term "waste of money" is perhaps derisive to the psychic rewards that luxury goods generate, but for the average purchaser, I'd say it is useful to consider the issue in stark terms).  I've yet to read on this forum any post that refutes this in any substantial way.

 

Also, one's child might bring something to the table as well.  Sending a kid to a "good" school doesn't imply that that kid will become a "good" student.  The student has a lot to do with it as well.  I remember having a similar argument to this one while in high school with a mutual acquaintance (later to become a friend) who was arguing that there was something special about the private school experience that made those schools better than public schools.  I asked him to consider something: what if all the students at St. X (where he attended school) where switched out with all the students at Taft.  The teachers, system, classes, etc. at both schools remained the same, only the student body changed.  Which school do you think would be "better"?  My friend took the honorable road out of that dilemma and said nothing.

 

Just as it is obnoxious when people who don't go downtown say that "downtown sucks", offhand comments toward Cincinnati Public tend to irritate me greatly, particularly as they tend to come from people who have no first hand knowledge of the school system.  The fact that these same people have little second or third hand knowledge or can't even formulate a decent argument other than, "it's my right to..." or "For my kids there's no price for..." reinforce the notion that they don't take the subject seriously.

Fascinating discussion. Since this is basically a Cincy discussion, we can mostly drop the 'private' label, because this is really about parochial versus public. The CCD, CHCA, and Seven Hills (Summit too though nominally Catholic) operate on a whole different level than the local parish school or even the diocesan high schools. Those faculty are often better educated and better paid than your fresh out of Xavier or MSJ or UC teacher at the parish schools. I'm not sure where the Protestant private schools fit in, though my sense is that many of them are similar to the lower level Catholic schools. It is worth noting that the parochial schools are inexorably moving toward regional schools which should provide them with the resources to compete with the public schools in terms of facilities and faculty pay.

 

I'd argue against public schools from a radical cultural place. The lack of public funding for parochial schools since at least the 1850s represents the profound anti-Catholicism of American society and not any sort of nominal 'church-state' separation crap. The Jewish community started to realize in the mid-70s that their community would be substantially weakened by continued allegiance to Protestant/post-Protestant schools (oops Public) and so they expanded the Day School movement. Though they don't get the same percentages that the parochial schools did when the bishops really supported them, it has provided a space for cultural continuity. I would argue for parochial schools on the same basis.

My only point is that just because you purchase something that is more expensive and more exclusive doesn't mean it will function better to it's competitor (I learned that the hard way when I bought that damn Mac PowerBook).

 

LOL.  I've been down that road myself.

 

 

I think we should probably just agree to disagree on the rest of it.  We could both type for days and not really change anything.  Again, I'd like to reiterate that I have nothing against public schools, and am not in any way trying to say that they do a sub-par job or anything of the like.  I simply take exception to the notion that private schools are a waste of money and the attitude that typically gets thrown at private, often Catholic, schools.  There's no way to really prove or disprove that; I just don't want to this spiral into the cliche'd "public schools are full of drugs/guns" vs "private schools are for elitist rich and/or hyper-religous people" BS arguments.

 

 

 

I'd argue against public schools from a radical cultural place. The lack of public funding for parochial schools since at least the 1850s represents the profound anti-Catholicism of American society and not any sort of nominal 'church-state' separation crap. The Jewish community started to realize in the mid-70s that their community would be substantially weakened by continued allegiance to Protestant/post-Protestant schools (oops Public) and so they expanded the Day School movement. Though they don't get the same percentages that the parochial schools did when the bishops really supported them, it has provided a space for cultural continuity. I would argue for parochial schools on the same basis.

 

That's a really unique perspective.  I don't know much about Day Schools or the roots of the Catholic schools, but it sounds like an interesting argument could be made based on this.

I think this thread is hilarious. It sounds like no one on here has actually went to the terrible CPS schools, yet speak on their behalf. My parents never cared about my education, in fact almost no one in my family or extended family ever went to college. I had to find the resources all on my own and do what I had to do.  I grew up inside the city and went to sh!tty public schools for elementary and middle school--Jacob's Center (more like the Justice Center). Then I tested into Walnut Hills and went there for a while, then I moved in with my dad in Columbus and didn't realize I'd be going to such a sh!tty public school there. Trust me, the difference is night and day. In 7th grade I was suspended for a total of 20 days because I was in two fights; both of which I didn't provoke, but "it didn't look like self defense". That wouldn't have happend at most suburban schools and probably not parochial either. I dealt with a lot of racism, of course, because most CPS schools are predominantly black. I remember having an incredibly thought provoking social studies teacher who was one of the VERY FEW teachers that knew how to keep the kids in line, but she got a PHD and now she's the principle or assistant principle at Walnut.

 

 

LincolnKennedy: A purely economic standpoint on salaries in CPS's favor is irrelevant. They pay more because they have to, definitely not because their teachers are more qualified. True, people respond to incentives, but there are more incentives than money, such as status and actually being able to do your job. You probably don't have memories of fights breaking out in your classroom, or seen kids curse at teachers and throw books at them. at JC we were sporadically searched all the time in the middle of class with metal detectors. They've found guns in people's backpacks. Many other people had the same experience, but they're not the type of people who debate politics with educated people on UrbanOhio.

 

The argument that parents of kids going to private schools still pay taxes, is misguided. They're less apathetic about their kid's education than most CPS parents. They dont benefit from the way taxes are allocated and they cause public school levies to fail.

 

I would love to see kids of different socio-economic classes go to school together. It would benefit everyone, but unless we outlaw private schools, it's not going to happen and I highly doubt any of you highly educated people will be sending your kid to schools like Woodward, Taft, Aiken, Hughes, Dater, Mt. Healthy, West High etc. Not everyone tests into Walnut or SCPA. It's much easier to force people of different socio-economic status to live in the same neighborhoods through subsidies than it is to so with schools. I can't believe how unrealistic some of these posts are.

 

P.S. please spare me of any rhetorical questions.

I guess if we are getting personal. I spent time in CPS (alternative Spanish during the Lee Etta Powell reign in the mid-80s) and then to one of the better parish schools and finishing off at St. X. Just some background.

FWIW, I went to Woodford, Anderson Place (which is now Parker), and Walnut. Those were all non-terrible CPS schools.

I went to Sands Montessori and Walnut Hills.

 

To dmerkow:  While I am agreeing with your historical assessment, I feel that since the priest (and nun) shortage, the Catholic schools of today aren't much different from the secular private schools, which were typically created by a "charismatic" founder (local example Helen Lotspeich), and then generally devolved into a status symbol or "must have" for the wealthy (to be fair, I've met some pretty interesting and worthwhile folks from Seven Hills, though none from Summit or CCD).  I'd be curious to see if there the Church keeps track of whether or not the schools have an influence in retaining the local Catholic population.  We basically know the same guys who went through these schools, and to me it seems that there's little rhyme or reason to whether or not they stay in the community (what has Bob had now, two 360s?)

 

I think this thread is hilarious. It sounds like no one on here has actually went to the terrible CPS schools, yet speak on their behalf. My parents never cared about my education, in fact almost no one in my family or extended family ever went to college. I had to find the resources all on my own and do what I had to do.  I grew up inside the city and went to sh!tty public schools for elementary and middle school--Jacob's Center (more like the Justice Center). Then I tested into Walnut Hills and went there for a while, then I moved in with my dad in Columbus and didn't realize I'd be going to such a sh!tty public school there. Trust me, the difference is night and day. In 7th grade I was suspended for a total of 20 days because I was in two fights; both of which I didn't provoke, but "it didn't look like self defense". That wouldn't have happend at most suburban schools and probably not parochial either. I dealt with a lot of racism, of course, because most CPS schools are predominantly black. I remember having an incredibly thought provoking social studies teacher who was one of the VERY FEW teachers that knew how to keep the kids in line, but she got a PHD and now she's the principle or assistant principle at Walnut.

 

Your bad experience is a perfect example of why we shouldn't make judgments based on anecdotal evidence, but instead need to agree on objective factors for comparisons if we are to make any worthwhile conclusions.

 

LincolnKennedy: A purely economic standpoint on salaries in CPS's favor is irrelevant. They pay more because they have to, definitely not because their teachers are more qualified. True, people respond to incentives, but there are more incentives than money, such as status and actually being able to do your job.

 

Well, you have to an accredited teacher to teach at a public school, whereas you can just be a college graduate to teach at some private school.  The accreditation is designed to increase competence, and since it requires more work on the part of the individual to get the accreditation, then that individual is paid more accordingly.  So, in short, you're wrong.  The economic aspect of teacher's salaries is highly relevant.  As is the fact that a teacher with a master's degree or a Ph.D. is paid more as well.

 

 

You probably don't have memories of fights breaking out in your classroom, or seen kids curse at teachers and throw books at them. at JC we were sporadically searched all the time in the middle of class with metal detectors. They've found guns in people's backpacks. Many other people had the same experience, but they're not the type of people who debate politics with educated people on UrbanOhio.

 

Again, wrong assumption.  I remember clearly when Jermaine got into a fight with Ebony in the coatroom when I was in 5th grade and Ms. McNamee walked in to break it up and Jermaine hit her in the face (though he was just swinging wildly and didn't intend to hit her).  I remember fights in grade school and high school, and I remember being in and around fights in my almost exclusively Catholic neighborhood where pretty much every kid went to Cardinal Pacelli.  I remember fights on the soccer field between kids from Sands (my school) and kids from St. Mary's (what bunch of little shits they were.  Asshole parents as well).  So you had a bad experience at Jacobs Center.  Well now that program is at Clark (my sister teaches a community [what they call classrooms] of eighth graders there) and it is a lot better now.  Sorry you had a bad experience, but that doesn't mean that the whole system blows.  My first year at Walnut Hills had some serious discipline problems, but once they got David Shepard retired from being principal things got a lot better.

 

We aren't debating politics.  Once again I'll repeat myself- I asked someone who made a comment if they would mind explaining their comment, and then I gave my opinion.  I assume that "educated people on UrbanOhio" is a crack at me, so let me be explicit- I don't know you, but I consider myself better educated than you, and a great deal of my better education was spent in Cincinnati Public Schools.

 

The argument that parents of kids going to private schools still pay taxes, is misguided. They're less apathetic about their kid's education than most CPS parents. They dont benefit from the way taxes are allocated and they cause public school levies to fail.

 

P.S. please spare me of any rhetorical questions.

 

Request denied.  Your statement that private school parents are less apathetic about their children's education than public school parents is an unprovable cliche.  I assume you are currently in college.  Why don't you try taking a few philosophy courses or some history courses where you have to learn to write persuasively and use critical reasoning?  I took some great courses with Dan Beaver back in 1996-1997 but I think he's retired by now.  Try Jane Robinson in the philosophy department.  I think she focuses in aesthetics.

Your bad experience is a perfect example of why we shouldn't make judgments based on anecdotal evidence, but instead need to agree on objective factors for comparisons if we are to make any worthwhile conclusions.

 

You say to not argue based on anecdotal evidence but you use it to create your whole arguement.

 

Times when LK uses anectdote in above post:

 

1-I've met some pretty interesting and worthwhile folks from Seven Hills, though none from Summit or CCD (what the hell does interesting and worthwhile folks qualify as?)

 

2-I remember clearly when Jermaine got into a fight with Ebony in the coatroom when I was in 5th grade and Ms. McNamee walked in to break it up and Jermaine hit her in the face (though he was just swinging wildly and didn't intend to hit her)

 

3-I remember fights in grade school and high school, and I remember being in and around fights in my almost exclusively Catholic neighborhood where pretty much every kid went to Cardinal Pacelli.  I remember fights on the soccer field between kids from Sands (my school) and kids from St. Mary's (what bunch of little sh!ts they were.  Asshole parents as well)

4-Well now that program is at Clark (my sister teaches a community [what they call classrooms] of eighth graders there) and it is a lot better now

 

 

 

I don't know you, but I consider myself better educated than you

 

I expect more from someone who proclaims to be of superior intelligence...

The entire point of the anecdotes were to show that anyone can bring up counter-examples if the only criteria is personal experience. Thus, "Sorry you had a bad experience, but that doesn't mean the whole system blows."

 

Besides, he was refuting the argument of David, which was that the other forumers probably don't remember fights, cursing, etc, at which point experiences to the contrary aren't anecdotes, but empirical data.

 

Oh, and claims of a better education are not the same as proclamations of superior intelligence.

Thank you Cramer.  At least I know somebody reads my posts besides my mom.

Look man, you're being condescending as hell, even though it's subtle, you know it. I also went to Washington Park elementary and Quebec Heights in Price Hill but I doubt anyone cares to hear any more anecdotes. The problems with CPS schools are prevalent in other cities as well and test scores do correlate to parents income. There's also a strong correlation to the parents education. I can't give links to any statistics pertaining to how many of them enroll their child in private schools but I know that people don't send their kids to private schools unless they have the means to do so.  It's not just a problem in Cincinnati. I just hate to see Walnut, SCPA etc. brought up as a poster child when they're so far removed from most CPS schools. That seems just as anecdotal to me. When I went there, I thought it was great that kids from every neighborhood were represented; I felt it gave everyone in the inner city a chance, if they were smart enough, but I don't think people on here are looking at the big picture. CPS is stigmatized. Look at how many people are choosing homeschooling or yanking their kids out and putting them into private schools. They lose funding and have to modify their budget accordingly. Cincinnati is particularly bad because we have so many private schools; probably the close to having the most per capita in the nation. I think elementary schools are deemed as less important than high schools; many parents let it slide until then, then they consider St. X, Elder, Purcell, blah blah blah. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see all CPS schools improve but they're dealing with issues much greater than the schools themselves.

^I like to think that I'm adding a spirit of sarcastic whimsy to what are typically overwrought discussions between people who are arguing about public policy that they are in no way creating (please note I include myself in this group, okay fellas?  I'm also trying to make my posts fun for the people I know personally who come to this forum).

 

But I'll agree that I'm condescending, though I prefer to consider the word with its positive, 18th century connotation.  Someone posted a statement that implied the Cincinnati Public Schools don't provide quality education.  I asked that that statement be qualified, and made a statement of my own, to the effect that sending ones kids to private schools is a waste of money.  I'm not going to sit here and name all the decent public schools in Cincinnati, and I'm not trying to convince anyone to send their kids to CPS.  The fact is that the same subjects are taught at any accredited high school, and (I say again) as Jskinner pointed out, more money is spent on teachers in the public school system than at private systems, so teacher quality is would arguably be better at CPS.  So what is it that people are paying for?  The obvious answer is that private schools can pick and choose who they have as students and public schools can't.  So it would be a good guess that that is what people are paying for, the exclusivity of classmates, which seems to me to be a luxury good.  It is generally agreed that socio-economic status is a good indicator of success in school.  Therefore, I am of the opinion that the average middle-class resident of Cincinnati would pay less for the same or more by sending their child to a Cincinnati Public School (individual cases might not apply, but we were speaking of generalities).  To expect one's child, upon initial enrollment in school, to be on track to enter an exclusive Ivy League college or similar, is an absurd, irrational and premature action (despite how common it may be).  Do you think those jackasses in New York City who try to get on waiting lists for kindergartens are making rational decisions (though that is obviously an extreme example)?

 

Why put your opinion out on a forum if you don't expect some criticism (also using this word in the non-pejorative, 18th century sense)?  Isn't the point of this place so that urban enthusiasts can debate and learn from each other?  Somebody called me ignorant for saying that it struck me that paying for private school is generally a waste of money.  I made fun of them for misspelling "ignorant" and it blew up in my face.  I don't have any hard feelings.  We're just a bunch of over enthusiastic nerds anyway.  Keep it loose.

Keep in mind that since most of the CPS schools are "schools of choice" parents now have more control to select their child's classmates.  Two years ago, if our only choice was the neighborhood school or private, then I might have chosen private (or moved).  The magnet program removed the dilemma that parents of 4-yr olds faced, which was: should we move to a better school district or pay for private schools?  Now you can stay in your crappy neighborhood, but still go to a school where all the kids are not in poverty.  All you have to do is stay up all-night one night waiting in a line.

I made fun of them for misspelling "ignorant" and it blew up in my face.  I don't have any hard feelings.  We're just a bunch of over enthusiastic nerds anyway.  Keep it loose.

 

Glad to hear it.  I genuinely thought that was funny, by the way.  I didn't point it out just to be a jerk... that was only partly my motivation.  :-D

...Now you can stay in your crappy neighborhood, but still go to a school where all the kids are not in poverty.  All you have to do is stay up all-night one night waiting in a line.

 

You can't even get Opening Day tickets that way anymore.

CPS to rehab, not build new Westwood Elementary

BY BEN FISCHER | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

January 5, 2008

 

WESTWOOD - Reversing a short-lived proposal to entirely rebuild Westwood Elementary, developers for Cincinnati Public Schools are now moving ahead on extensive renovations to the 100-year-old building, as originally planned.

 

In a little-publicized memo sent to neighborhood leaders after the November elections, CPS officials said they'd abandoned the idea of rebuilding.

 

CPS first changed course after state architects determined that a new school would be at least $1.58 million cheaper than renovating. According to the November memo, further analysis indicated the cost of four different alternatives were all within $2 million to $4 million of each other.

 

Great to hear they are keeping Westwood, that is a beautiful historic school building that is part of the neighborhood fabric.

^Word!

Great to hear they are keeping Westwood, that is a beautiful historic school building that is part of the neighborhood fabric.

 

westside = bestside

Monday, January 14, 2008 - 9:54 AM EST

 

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/01/14/daily1.html?jst=b_ln_hl

Cincinnati Public Schools gets star turn on CNNBusiness Courier of Cincinnati

 

 

The strategies that boosted graduation rates at several of Cincinnati Public Schools' worst-performing high schools will be aired Tuesday on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" show.

 

Cincinnati Public Schools making the grade

BY RANDY SIMES | URBANCINCY

January 13, 2008

 

CINCINNATI - Many cite schools as a reason they don't live within city limits (or within the CPS district). I have said before that it is more of an excuse than an actual reason, but it is what it is. Cincinnati Public Schools have been improving their state rating over the past few years, and recently have been receiving some national praise.

 

In a recent Education Week article (PDF) they say:

 

Despite being plagued by the problems that beset most urban school systems, the Cincinnati public schools have managed to increase the four-year high school graduation rate from 51 percent in 2000, to 79 percent in 2007. Perhaps more important, they have, as of 2007, eliminated the gap between African-American and white students in graduation rates. This feat was accomplished, moreover, as the state of Ohio was raising academic standards and requiring students to pass more-challenging assessments to receive their diplomas.

 

While a 79 percent graduation rate isn't necessarily anything to write home about...it is a strong improvement. This strong improvement has certainly not gone unnoticed, and is going beyond an article in Education Week. CPS Superintendent, Rosa Blackwell, will be on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight show this coming Tuesday night at 8pm. Blackwell will be joined with Withrow University principal Sharon Johnson to talk about the district's improvements.

 

Furthermore the district has broken ground on what will become the nation's first public K-12 arts school. Just to reiterate...crime is down, schools are improving, and you can get a property tax abatement for moving into the city. So what's holding you back?

Some great news!  Rosa Blackwell recommended renovating historic Rothenberg School (instead of demolishing it) in Over-the-Rhine last night at the BOE meeting.  Note that this is not final until the board votes to accept her recommendation, but this is a HUGE victory for the neighborhood and the schools.

That is good news!

What is happening to Vine Hill Elementary?  Looks like it's abandoned. 

Some great news!  Rosa Blackwell recommended renovating historic Rothenberg School (instead of demolishing it) in Over-the-Rhine last night at the BOE meeting.  Note that this is not final until the board votes to accept her recommendation, but this is a HUGE victory for the neighborhood and the schools.

hooray!!!!

Vine St is currently housing all the kids that will go to Rothenberg.

CPS re-centralizing school budgeting

BY BEN FISCHER | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

January 17, 2008

 

CINCINNATI - Cincinnati Public Schools will suspend key elements of the districts decentralized budget-making process, reclaiming central-office control over many financial decisions that had been left to individual schools.

 

Details of the plan are still developing, but several officials say the district has already abandoned its student-based budgets for next school year, the most dramatic fallout of CPS financial crisis to date.

 

The process, first created in the 1998-99 school year, gives each school a set amount of money per student, with some special considerations, to spend with few strings attached.

 

 

“How do you have schools keeping rainy day funds when you’re in the financial situation we’re in?”

 

When they sit on the amount of unused land that they do and are unwilling to sell it, then the financial situation is in part their own doing.  And their unwillingness to unload this is a double hit on them as they do not pay property tax that a regular property owner would pay that would in large part go to the school system.

School's staff being replaced

Taft Elementary hasn't raised student performance

BY BEN FISCHER | [email protected]

 

Cincinnati Public Schools will replace the entire staff at the chronically low-performing Taft Elementary School in Mount Auburn.

 

The action is the result of the school's inability to meet improvement goals mandated by the federal government and, before that, the district for nine consecutive years.

 

Students there score about 20 points below the district average on standardized tests, according to state data.