A "top" school district-- how important?

June 23, 2009 7:11 PM

Public education filter: if you went to school in a good district, a not-so-great district, or an in-between district, how did it affect the quality of your education and your success later in life?

The husband and I have been having a debate (not entirely academic, since we're in the process of moving) about the importance of school quality in producing a well-educated and successful child.

He was educated in one of the top-rated districts in the state, with lots of money and mostly professional families; I went to school in a middling-to-slightly-subpar semi-rural district, with mostly blue-collar families. We both excelled in school and got into the same Ivy League university, both did well there, and I consider us approximately equally well-equipped by our respective educations. Naturally, he places a lot of stock in the importance of "good" schools, while I'm more skeptical, assuming we're not talking about absolutely abysmal schools (violence, rampant crime, etc).

He feels that since good school districts are better funded, can afford better teachers, more enrichment activities, more varied coursework, and better facilities, that must make a difference in kids' education.

I contend that a bright kid with involved parents will do most of his/her learning outside the classroom anyway-- if you're reading interesting books and having intelligent family discussions and taking the odd university class, then why does it matter whether your classroom has a SmartBoard or your school sponsors field trips to Europe? In addition, I worry about the small-fish/big-pond effect of attending a district where all the students are super-successful and motivated; I knew a professor, for instance, whose daughter got into no top colleges despite having an awesome GPA and activities at one of the most prestigious private schools in the nation, simply because all her classmates were equally successful and there wasn't any way to distinguish herself from the pack.

Finally, maybe I've just watched too many showings of Traffic and My Super-sweet 16, but I wonder about the character issues associated with wealthier, high-achieving communities. Poor communities have their problems too, but it seems as though it'd be easier for a nice middle-class kid to get sucked into materialism/cliquishness/shallow hypersexuality/whitecollar drugs than meth use or cow-tipping, or whatever.

By way of broadening our knowledge-base, I'd love some additional perspectives on this (some useful answers here, but that question focused on private v. public school). Did you love or hate your good (or bad) public-school experience? What factors really do make a difference in the quality of education a public school district provides?

posted by Bardolph to education (37 comments total)

What mattered the most in my education was the wonderful AP English 3 year spiral curriculum they had at my (3-year) high school. Each year built on the previous: the reading spiraled (American Lit, then British Lit, then World Lit), the writing spiraled (5 paragraph essay, 20 page essay, single page essay), and the teachers worked in consort so it felt more like a three year course in literature and research and writing than 10th grade English, 11th grade, etc...

I did work in an elementary school for a while, in a rather odd demographic school (half country-club folks, half trailer park migrant workers), and from that experience I can say that teachers strive to work with any and all kids as well as possible, regardless of resources. In fact, some schools in low-income areas have more funds due to Title I funding than the wealthy districts.

I really think it's more about the individual teachers a child has than the overall school.

How this might relate to the entire school district, I have no idea. I went K-12 in the same school district, and later worked in that same system. Others can speak to that more clearly than I can.
posted by hippybear at 7:17 PM on June 23

I went to a bad school in a poor part of Chicago instead of a good school because I didn't know better at the time. I hated those four years. Good schools are good.
posted by LSK at 7:21 PM on June 23

Also: It's easier for students in poor schools to get swept into shallow lines of thought. Lower-class students seem (anecdotally) to be more attracted to promises of wealth and vanity.
posted by LSK at 7:24 PM on June 23

I went to a wealthy midwestern suburban high school, graduated 1970. I liked first grade; hated school thereafter. I was a right brain thinker, to put it bluntly and in the argot of decades past. College, I loved. I got a degree in alternative education (back when it briefly meant something other than school for losers) to try to make it better.

I now teach in a public high school, an arts school, and although the academic culture is not all that alternative, the kids certainly are, and it is a good job. I paid my dues in urban schools for a decade or so previously.

My story is much longer, of course. But my parents did not consider sending us to an all white private school, nor did we for our daughter.

I am an outspoken advocate of better education for everybody. That doesn't sound too controversial, but the ramifications of putting this into practice are problematic for many people.
posted by kozad at 7:25 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]

I went to your basic kids-of-professors-at-top-ranked-public-university public high school, but also attended a foofy private school and have relatives in a small rural district; I later worked at two college/university admissions offices. In both admissions situations (a small school and the aforementioned university), the counselors were very familiar with the schools and districts in their assigned territories. So, for example, they could say, "Sure, Zelda only got a 3.4, but she went to Fantastic Public High, where they have really hard courses" or "Yes, Hiram was the valedictorian, but there were 18 kids in his class and he had no AP options."

I'd say that the important things to keep in mind are diversity and access to diverse options. That will help build critical thinking skills. If you're in a small, rural district, does your kid have access to Internet resources, teachers who care, students of differing backgrounds, etc. regardless of the number of AP courses? If you're in a large public school or a foofy private school, is it competitive, or are people tracked and kept there?

I've seen a lot of students who worked themselves to the bone with high grades AND oodles of worthy extracurriculars but were boring as rocks/couldn't keep it together socially. And when I say socially, I mean being able to compassionately navigate the world and ALL of its people, from the rude to the smart to the foreign to the disabled to the old to the jocks... you get the idea. For reference, you couldn't pay me enough to homeschool my kid; I feel that this is the absolute most critical skill for getting along in the world.
posted by Madamina at 7:28 PM on June 23

I attended a very poor rural high-school. For context, if you and your husband have any choice whatsoever in where you live, it is likely that your worst-case scenario school is much better than my high school.

It definitely had a negative impact on the course of my education and career, but not a crippling one. There were no AP or Honors classes, which meant I started college without a buffer of a certain number of credits that the kids from the suburban and urban high schools all had. It seemed like every other kid had "tested out" of this or that, or was getting AP credits for something or other, but not me.

I went to an elite college (I would say it is a step below the Ivies, but not in rigor or Nobel Laureates), and I was at a marked disadvantage from the beginning not only because I didn't get to start with some credits in the bank, but I was also without proper foundational knowledge in a number of disciplines. I was cool on literature and whatnot, but I wasn't enough of a motivated kid to teach myself chemistry or pre-calculus.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 7:39 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]

I was lucky to go to an inner-city public school where there were a few teachers who were thinking out of the box. Those teachers saw potential in me and pushed me to take the hardest and the most college-oriented classes possible. I had zero parental involvement and was pretty much an autodidact. I don't attribute my subsequent success to the school I attended. I can see the point that the person who posted is making about the pressure to succeed in a more competitive school in a more affluent district, but there is really no advantage on the other side of the coin, that is, being a success-oriented student in a low-functioning or "abysmal" school. If anything, the pressure is worse, because you are constantly asking yourself why you are bothering to try to succeed when large numbers of the students in your peer group expect to fail and drop out. As well, there is the pressure of being thought to be a nerd (or geek, faggot, or whatever the epithet is) by your peers because you are trying to succeed, along with the bullying and insanity that go along with it. I don't pretend to know the specifics of what the situation is like today -- I graduated from high school 25 years ago. But I would assume that many of the pressures are more magnified.
posted by blucevalo at 7:48 PM on June 23

I went to a magnet program in a lower-end school in a district of almost 200k kids (school districts==counties in Florida). My school did not have piles of money for things. No school trips. No fancy equipment. The teachers were great, my extracurriculars were minimal, I didn't study as hard as I could have, and I think I've done pretty well for myself.

I think my home environment definitely had a bigger influence on me. I have two successful working (medical doctor) parents that value education and critical thinking. They are also not the hardest-working in their field and did not require hard work, just enough work to be very good. They did not get themselves involved in my school work, but they did do things that contributed to my education, such as providing me with books and taking me to museums and other similar learning experiences.

So now I am in the midst of a unique work situation, making less than my parents (I didn't get the medical degree) but making more than enough for my lifestyle, and not overworking myself. I get my work done but value my life outside of work as well.

I had a good education, I learned a lot outside of class. I think parents are awesome but don't need to actually be involved in education so much as engage their children and provide some amount of feedback and concern about their children's performance in school. And be available to provide help if needed, of course.
posted by that girl at 7:54 PM on June 23

"Top" schools tend to produce better students due to selection bias and a cohort effect. People feel a personal connection with teachers but I believe (without corroborating evidence because I'm not in education) that it has to do with peer pressure for academic success and, very importantly, selection bias. "Poor" schools take the students who can't get in anywhere else. This is a broad statement and of it would be silly to deny that there will be exceptions but that's my take on the correlation between success and the quality of the school.
posted by GuyZero at 8:02 PM on June 23

I went to a good district and thought it gave me a huge advantage going in to college.

I actually felt college was easier than high school in terms of the difficulty of material and amount of course work. It was a breeze.

I ran into groups of people who never learned how to type efficiently on a keyboard and spent hours in the computer labs typing up a report and even students who barely had any computer experience.

The schools I attended had a huge selection of art classes. Photography, throwing clay pots, digital design and animation, etc. While none of this pertains to my current career I always found it a plus compared to people who went to schools where art classes never progressed beyond crayons.
posted by simplethings at 8:05 PM on June 23

I went to two schools, Loy Norrix in the Kalamazoo school system, and Lake Forest HS in Lake Forest. The difference, at the time, in district funding, per pupil, was roughly $7-9000, per year.

In Kalamazoo, the year I was supposed to graduate, less than 50% of the senior class was on schedule to graduate (they managed to get 75% to pass, which was considered an achievement). At Lake Forest, something like 95% of the students went to college, even though some really shouldn't have.

Academically, the difference was astounding, primarily in the breadth and depth of courses. Norrix had two tracks, college prep and non-college courses in English, sciences, and math. At Lake Forest, you had remedial courses (not, of course, labeled as such), college prep, honors, AP, and bunches of classes on the side that were truly "elective classes." Furthermore, Lake Forest was able to offer classes (Geology, for one example) that Loy Norrix had no room in the budget for. Class sizes were smaller, teachers were better paid/less burnt out.

As a true borderline student, my school counselor took over for me when it came to figuring out college, suggested several schools, and really helped me to get in to university, when about two years before, I'd considered dropping out and getting a GED. When, at Norrix, I wanted to attend the informational meeting for students looking at Michigan State (which I was accepted at, after Lake Forest), my guidance counselor saw me come into the room, and point-blank asked me what I thought I was doing, coming to that meeting.

Lake Forest HS is a good school, but it is definitely not the norm. Norrix was pretty bad, but obviously not the worst. The thing is, Lake Forest worked hard to find something to grab individual student's attention. They wanted kids to succeed, and never, if at all, gave up on students. Due to the situation at Norrix (gangs, drugs, pregnancies, whatever) many students were indeed given up on.
posted by Ghidorah at 8:07 PM on June 23

I went to a very good grade school, the standards were high, the teachers great and disciple rigorous. Hated it and balked at going to a similar high school because I felt I needed to see how other kids did in public school.

It was a good public school, but not as good as the private school, yet I barely passed it because I was so fucking bored and never did homework (while acing tests) and hated the warehousing and drama.

When my daughter came of age we sent her to the better schools. Supportive families are nice, but it's much easier when the school environment is also supportive and pushing the kids.

but I wonder about the character issues associated with wealthier, high-achieving communities.

You're still the parents. Don't be afraid to say no, make them earn things and instill a sense of proportion and responsibility.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:32 PM on June 23

I attended a very poor rural high-school. [...] It definitely had a negative impact on the course of my education and career, but not a crippling one. There were no AP or Honors classes, which meant I started college without a buffer of a certain number of credits that the kids from the suburban and urban high schools all had. [...] I went to an elite college, and I was at a marked disadvantage from the beginning not only because I didn't get to start with some credits in the bank

Ignatius' experience was very similar to mine, except my school had honors classes in a few disciplines, and I got to take one AP class. I was still behind my classmates in college since I couldn't skip anything.

I wouldn't want my kids to go through the same thing.
posted by edrnjevich at 8:41 PM on June 23

You are getting the obvious "better schools are better" answers I think. A few more distinctions to consider:

Be sure you are clear on what makes the school good. When I was going through it I was in the 'bad' city school, but from what I could tell the 'good' suburban schools weren't actually better, they just told better stories. Drugs there ran in the middle class, in our school they ran more among the impoverished. That sort of thing.

Another aspect is what actual programs exist in the schools. I was in a school with a majority of kids on federal assistance to buy lunches. There was a 'reputation' for crime. There were stories of groups (the 5 percenters) who celebrated academic failure and spent there time getting young ladies pregnant. BUT, there were also separated accelerated academic classes, a full slate of after school activities, and they offered every single available AP class along with a few classes cross enrolled with the local SUNY for college credit. Because of the availability of those resources, it allowed me to get out of it what I put into it (or more).

As interested parents I'm betting your children will be able to do okay wherever they go, but the schools that offer the most genuine opportunity (not just showy facilities) is what it sounds like you are looking for. I wish there were a better way to spot it with certainty. One last thought is that I wouldn't give up the experience of living with the diversity around me while growing up. You may want to consider those implications as well.
posted by meinvt at 8:48 PM on June 23

If you can afford the rich school neighborhood, it might be worth it. The truly rich bratty kids often end up in private school.

I went to a "bad" public school (heavily underfunded and neglected, even in comparison to other schools in our district; few AP courses; average SAT score of 900). I got out just fine and did well. However, I think kids take a lot from their peers. My particular peer group was the nerdiest bunch of mother-led kids in the school, and since they were my friends, I did what they did. If I had had any other group of friends in that school, I would have gone on to a much worse college (my parents would have required me to go) and likely developed much less academically.

Many of my neighbors went to nearby private high schools to avoid our hellish public high school. In California, at least, the university system is required to accept a certain (very high) percentage of CA public high school graduates. Because I went to a public high school, I got in to better public colleges that my private-schooled friends, and I graduated with less of a bratty complex.

My friends that went to "rich" public high schools DEFINITELY came in to my university with a better preparation. There's a reason I didn't pursue math or science in university-- because I entered as a freshman at a clear disadvantage. I really regret this now.
posted by samthemander at 9:18 PM on June 23

I attended private school through third grade and then switched to a public schools in a wealthy district. I feel like the quality of my education improved at that point. There's lots to say but I think others are covering much of it. I think the most interesting aspect is that I know so many people with horror stories or great disillusionment about the public education system, its teachers, and their goals (of conformity and discipline rather than learning and individual achievement). These were things that for the most part I never experienced.
posted by grouse at 9:24 PM on June 23

The answer to your question will vary based on aspects of the individual child, which in turn are determined largely (although not entirely) by his/her parents. If you're the type of kid who's likely to fall through the cracks, then a better school--one where the teachers pay attention to you and you have intelligent peers--will probably make a big difference. However, if you're a bright kid whose parents encourage you in reading and learning, it likely won't matter if you go to an okay school or a great one. Given that you're asking this question, it's a good bet that your child will be of the latter variety.

My personal story: I went to a not particularly good rural high school (many of my peers didn't go to college at all, and those who did largely attended state schools). However, both my parents are academics, and they encouraged me to read, sent me to nerd camp over the summer, etc. I ended up doing just fine and attending a good college (Williams). When I got there, I was enormously glad that I had avoided the hyper-competitive craziness that characterized the high school experiences of so many of my peers. I'm *still* really happy about this, and I seldom felt unprepared at college. Finally, it is worth thinking about the big fish/little pond issue that you brought up. I probably would not have gotten in to Williams had I been just one more candidate from an elite public school rather than a standout applicant from a mediocre public school.
posted by ethorson at 9:31 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]

I think a good school is invaluable for teaching the little things. simplethings mentioned people not knowing how to type because they never learned in school; I'd say the single biggest thing I learned from high school was how to write an essay. Maybe it's just because I'm in liberal arts and always have to write essays, but I am so thankful my high school English teachers drilled us so hard on every aspect of them. How to write an outline, how to create a thesis, how to structure an argument, word economy, spelling, research, MLA citation... I can't even begin to quantify how much energy that's saved me in the long run. I think that's the sort of benefit you get from a good school and AP classes that is less common in lower quality districts.

Technology is another area where gaps between great & average districts can be huge. Everyone from an average district will probably end up knowing their way around Word, Excel, and Powerpoint, but kids from great districts will learn programming languages, know how to make videos, and I think generally be more confident with new technology.
posted by lilac girl at 9:52 PM on June 23

I went to a large (3k+) public high school in a good district. I don't think I could have gotten a better education anywhere else. However, I have friends who were miserable and fell through the cracks who went to the same school.

A good school is useful, but not a guarantee. Nor is it necessary beyond a minimum. You need involved parents more, as long as the school offers hard enough classes, or a way for students to do harder work otherwise (local college classes, etc).

So, I'd say, check first that the school offers college prep and AP courses (or age appropriate equivalent; hard coursework probably means less to younger students who, as you say, do most of their learning elsewhere). Then check yourself to see that you'll put in the effort to get your child the best education in whichever school you choose.
posted by nat at 10:00 PM on June 23

It depends on the person and circumstances too. I went to good public schools and did well, but I don't think I would have done so well otherwise only because I'm not innately motived.

On the other hand I once worked with this engineer who was working on his Masters in chip design in his spare time. He was the smartest of all of us and eventually got his PhD. Once we all decided to look up our high schools' scores (based on a standardized test all students of all grades take in California). His high school and it had the lowest score of any school in California. It was in a bad part of LA.

We all looked at him funny. "Wasn't there a lot of crime and students who didn't care about education?"

He looked defensive. "Well, yeah, but I didn't hang out with those kids." Apparently there was a small group of motivated kids and a handful of teachers who recognized and encouraged them. Still, I'm boggled to this day.
posted by eye of newt at 10:11 PM on June 23

I went to an affluent, exurban high school that had amazing facilities and the best of everything. I tested right on the border for AP classes and my mom pushed the administration to let me have a go at it. We had biology dissection labs where we could choose which specimen that we dissected. We had more than one art studio which everything under the sun. A small group of my classmates and I were working on a side project programming in BASIC (this was 1982). Nothing was broken. Everything was shiny, and new, and clean.

I had an incredibly miserable time at that school and didn't realize the extent to which it had affected me until I was in college.

This was a very white school (I am white and female). I remember one black student and one Asian student out of 300 kids in my graduating class. The culture of the school emphasized conformity. It was in a very wealthy suburb where there was a small contingent of us from a lower middle class background. There was no diversity, no permission or tolerance for individual expression. To go anywhere in this community, you needed a car. Boredom was rampant, and so was underage drinking and drugs. The pecking order at the school had not changed since the elementary grades. Was it safe? Well, no one was shooting at each other in the parking lot.

It was very, very easy in this school to misrepresent what you actually knew and you weren't encouraged to ask for help or speak up if you didn't understand something. I had a few wonderful teachers, especially in English and English Lit. I struggled in the sciences and math but no one ever seemed to care and I just slipped by with everyone else. Looking back, it seems that grade inflation was the norm. This was a high school that was teaching to standardized tests. If you were coming up with the numbers on test day, they were fine with you. And I was a talented multiple choice test taker.

When I hit college, I was prepared in some areas and not at all in others. This, of course, was made worse by the fact that I went to an ENORMOUS school for undergrad (not unusual to be one in a class of three hundred) with a less diverse culture than the one I came from in high school. I can honestly say that I didn't really learn how to properly plan for and write an excellent research paper until grad school. I still yearn to go back and relearn Algebra and Trig properly so I can feel confident with more advanced calculations. I can write essays all day long, and we definitely were exposed to some analytical thinking skills, but not as much as would be required by a really stellar high school education.

I realize that I excelled in the things that my mom liked to help me with (writing essays). But neither parent was really able to give me much support at home in my schoolwork. They both worked full-time and didn't have a lot of energy to ask about school. I used to crave museums but couldn't get to any until I had a driver's license and could drive myself there, thirty minutes away. I was a very different kid who was pressured to conform and that was painful and acutely affected my self confidence/self esteem. This was the only high school in our community. To attend another school wouldn't have been an option unless my whole family moved. This made me feel rather helpless at the time.

We are raising our daughter in a city neighborhood with access to museums, theaters, extracurricular activities galore. Our neighborhood is much more diverse than the one I experienced in high school (economically, racially, ethnically). I am just as concerned with my daughter getting exposed to diversity, resourcefulness, and variety as I am with her exposure to science, math, etc. In the city environment, we have a dazzling array of choices for schools--private, public, magnet schools, alternative schools. She will have access to different peer groups in the neighborhood, at school, for extracurricular activities. She won't be in an isolated bubble world where the pinnacle of success at school is measured by your acceptance onto a cheerleading squad, what car your dad drives, or what brand of tennis shoe you're wearing. Will there be some of that? Yep. Will there only be one template of what is acceptable in the community? Nope. I'm a firm believer that interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, analytical skills, curiosity, access to diversity, and resourcefulness are the hallmarks of a successful education. I can't dictate her success in school. But I can put her in an environment where she has a decent shot of being exposed to many of these things.
posted by jeanmari at 10:58 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]

I guess I don't understand what you mean by "district". I know it's an outlier, but I attended schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District, and although I personally think I got the best education possible for me at a magnet school...that doesn't mean I'd say you should go ahead and live anywhere within the borders of the LAUSD and hope for the best. In many large districts there are programs which allow students, by lottery or merit, to attend schools far from their homes which provide them with high-quality, free educations. A district can mean a lot of different things - a lot of urban districts are huge and very diverse in quality.

So before you go ahead and say "I wouldn't want to raise my kid in Giant Urban Wasteland because the schools are bad", keep in mind that for an involved, concerned parent, there are usually a few good schools to be had, and there's a distinct possibility you may be able to finagle your kid's way into those schools. Sandra Tsing Loh has been very hated-on recently on the blue, but her book Mother on Fire, while obnoxious in parts, really aptly captures some of the angst and heavy-duty analysis and shopping that goes into picking schools in LA. It also captures the fact that she eventually found a lot of fulfillment in volunteering at her own daughters' school to try to give back to the public school system and make it better for everyone.

What made my 13 years of public LA schools great was:
-extremely dedicated, passionate teachers in the three magnet schools I attended (I can think of several exceptions, but most of my teachers went way above and beyond the call of duty)
-a really stellar peer group - the magnet I was in picked its students from a lottery, but you could only get into that lottery if you hit a certain IQ target. While IQ doesn't mean that much, the combination of kids whose parents got them tested (or whose teachers recommended testing) and who actually scored above the threshold and parents who would put up with the commute and pressures of a magnet meant that I went to school with a lot of really smart, driven kids
-involved parents and local community - this got less true as I left elementary school, but you should have seen the school plays we put on in elementary school. We're talking sets and costumes that beat out plays I've paid big money to see. Plus an aging movie star donated a lawn to my school...this was after my time but I was shocked to drive by several years later and see kids playing on green grass and not blacktop
-in high school, tons of AP classes, which were required by the program

I think what my schools did for me was get me confident in math...my parents took care of the passion for reading and history at home, but neither of them got past Algebra II in school so they just couldn't provide that for me. For that reason, I'm glad my parents didn't just say "Well, crinklebat will get enough brain-stimulation at home and her school doesn't matter". Discovering I was a natural ace at calculus opened a lot of doors for me, and only a good teacher can really bring that out in a pretty shy, retiring young woman. If you think you can provide a more well-rounded home life for your kids, I don't think this is as important, but my folks were basically useless beyond arithmetic as far as homework help.
posted by crinklebat at 11:31 PM on June 23

I grew up in a house full of people reading books and making horrible messes of their lives.
I attended crappy rural public schools where I was generally better educated than the staff, and vastly better educated than the students.
I now live in a house full of books and live a life of which I have made somewhat less of a mess.
School is where we send our children to free ourselves of the burdens of having to have something worthwhile to teach them, the skills to actually teach said worthwhile thing and the four or so years worth of man hours dealing with their questions about it.
Children are taught three basic lessons in school: 1. Be still, 2. Be quiet, and 3. Do what you're told. Admittedly valuable lessons, but come on! Twelve years to teach it? See Spot get to the point...
YOU have the responsibility to offset these lessons with three of your own: 1. Ask every question, 2. Seek your own answers first, and 3. Be absolutely fearless.
What they make of their lives beyond these obstacles and with these tools is entirely their own business.
posted by EnsignLunchmeat at 11:31 PM on June 23 [4 favorites]

I went to a small-town Kansas school (3A = fewer than 200 in my high school = 25ish in each class), graduating in 1989. After that, went to University of Kansas which certainly ain't horrible but is also not Harvard.

I have been, done, and seen SO MUCH in my post-school life, and my lack of any sort of upper academic echelon experience has not hindered me one iota. In fact, I just got into the grad school of my choice despite my horrible college GPA, despite the fact that I did just enough at all points in school to just get by, despite the fact that the only extra-curricular activities offered in my youth were: "go outside and play and, oh, by the way, if you feel like it, go play on the basketball team or something..."

In short: life is what you make of it. Degrees and such from certain schools/universities may matter in certain contexts. But if you want your kids to be well-rounded, intelligent, curious people who are interested in making their own lives -- that education starts at home and it doesn't matter what goes on at school or related environments. You and your husband will be their most important teachers and that won't change no matter what school district - poor or affluent - you live in.
posted by hapax_legomenon at 12:24 AM on June 24

I went to one of the most competitive public high schools in the United States in an extremely wealthy district. Took all honors and AP courses, you name it.

I really hated the school itself and how my life seemed like a 60-hour-a-week career, as opposed to a learning environment, but I will say this...my college years felt like a cakewalk in comparison. I noticed other college students having a far more difficult time.

Nothing in my life will beat the miserable grind of my high school years. NOTHING.
posted by thisperon at 12:31 AM on June 24

I've found that a lot of it comes down to the kids your kids go to school with. My kids go to a somewhat affluent and very competitive public school system, and they're surrounded by peers whose parents place a very high value on education. So yes, starting in preschool these kids are in extracurricular math programs, etc., but they go to school with kids who are taught to care about education. Everyone does homework and tries hard because it's the cultural norm.

I see this making a difference because I work as a middle school special education teacher in a lower income town, and my students are most definitely missing that support. Parents don't come to conferences, interact with teachers, look at or even know about assignments, or send their kids to school.

When kids are surrounded by people who don't care about education, it can be hard socially to be intellectually curious and academic without getting hassled by the other kids. And those kids really struggle socially in that environment.

So I'd say if you could afford it, find a better ranked district because it's better to keep your kids surrounded by people with similar values instead of them being the freaky kid because they did their homework.
posted by dzaz at 5:01 AM on June 24

Also: It's easier for students in poor schools to get swept into shallow lines of thought. Lower-class students seem (anecdotally) to be more attracted to promises of wealth and vanity.

That's why they all went to work for hedge funds.
posted by ActingTheGoat at 5:30 AM on June 24

I attended a public magnet high school in the Upper East Side of NYC, and am very happy that I did. Students on the whole weren't rich, but the majority were super smart and extremely competitive. Going there forced me to work at several notches above what I would have if I had gone to less stressful places, and helped me tons later on.
posted by gushn at 6:37 AM on June 24

I moved around a lot as a kid, and wherever we moved, if possible, my parents tried to move us into a good school district.

I think this is very important, because there were some significant differences in curriculum between the schools, and one school's idea of college prep was different from another. The best school I went to was during the last two years of high school. It wasn't a super rich area, more middle class and some upper middle class, but the school was excellent, the class sizes were small, and the teachers were dedicated. Those are the most important qualities.

If I had kids, I would do the same thing my parents did, move to an excellent school district. Now, in addition, I did do a lot of learning on my own as well.

As jeanmari mentioned above, there is a downside to this. I basically grew up completely around white people, 99% of the time. I was very, very sheltered, and I do think I missed out on something as a result of this. It would be good to figure out some way to balance this.
posted by hazyspring at 6:46 AM on June 24

It really comes down to what sort of exposure to possibilities a school system can provide students. Simply put, a better school will invariably be more able to show kids all the possibilities in the wider world. This seems to track with income. And, the higher income of parents, the more diverse their experiences and careers are. Thus, more exposure to wider possibilities for the student's futures. These are the schools where you get kids graduating who plan to study all sorts of wide-ranging fields in college.

You don't seem to get this in lower-quality or poorer systems without some sort of special outside intervention. The result is that you get large numbers of kids who have no idea of what they might be able to accomplish in life. No idea that there's anything out there beyond what their parents and friends do.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:01 AM on June 24

I'm a teacher who's worked at about seven different schools. Schools matter, but not as much as student behavior and parental involvement. I've seen kids in schools without paper go ahead and learn because Mommy was encouraging them, and they hung out with the right crowd. I've also seen five loud disruptive students ruin the lesson for the twenty other kids in the room.

Private or public doesn't seem to matter much. I'd recommend visiting the schools you're interested in and talking to some teachers & students. If the teachers sound happy it's probably a great environment. If they are stressed, run.
posted by debbie_ann at 8:02 AM on June 24

The most important thing, aside from making sure the school your kids attend is safe, is parental involvement. Parents who are involved have kids who learn. Parents who are involved send their kids to enrichment activities in the community. Parents who are involved volunteer in the school and help the teachers and see what's going on every day, and if they don't like what they see they get it changed.

I went to schools in a Very Good District. Very wealthy, small student-to-teacher ratios. My parents really only cared about the grades I got, not whether or not I was finding something to be passionate about. We never talked about what I wanted to be when I grew up. My mother took me to one college to visit, the one closest to home. I was discouraged from applying to any universities far from home, but I did anyway. I was accepted but they wouldn't pay for it. I was so discouraged and, for lack of a better word, lost, that I just went to the college close to home. Long story short, it's taken me YEARS to figure out what I'm good at, to decide what I want to be when I grow up. I had some really good teachers in my schools, but that's just not enough. Parents matter more than people think.
posted by cooker girl at 9:23 AM on June 24

I feel like I went to the most average high school ever. The demographic of the students was from poverty level to students who lived in houses costing around 600k (this is in suburban Philly, NJ in 2003). Some students from school succeeded and some did not.

My school offered regular (pretty much remedial), college prep (standard), honors (smart kids), and AP courses (these were only available to smart seniors). Most kids were in college-prep or higher, unless they had a diagnosed learning disability, whether or not they were actually planning to go to college. We also had a spread of electives such as art, band, foreign languages, home ec, etc., but nothing really specific (like pot throwing or photography). The way the school day was scheduled though required all students to take at least one elective yearly.

To me the difference between the kids who did well and those who didn't was the support outside of school. There was even some kids in my graduating class that as youngins had severe learning disabilities and graduated high school through a college-prep track (they were on average 1.5 years older than someone who had not been held back).

In summary, so long as the school can accomodate a decent variety in levels of learning (remedial to AP level for academics and some introductory electives to keep kids exploring) then the most important factor is home life, regardless of school funding or the fancyness of the other students.
posted by WeekendJen at 12:36 PM on June 24

I'm trying to find an article about a study that basically said what makes the difference is good teachers, and less so the school or district. That is, if your child doesn't connect with their teachers, no matter how great the facilities they are going to struggle to stay engaged and interested. People who have gone to less great schools have found teachers and mentors that really propelled them into a great education. I also would agree with everyone who has pointed out that parent involvement is huge.

I think what I would do is visit some of the districts and schools involved. I'm not sure I would rely on a blanket assumption that wealthier district=better in every way. I've known people who went to top-notch public schools in wealthy areas that absolutely chafed at the homogeneous peer groups in those schools, particularly in high school (and this was in the Bay Area in California, where even the wealthy tend to be a little more laid back than other places).

I went to an awesome college prep middle school in Los Altos Hills. By the time I was a sophmore, I could not stand being in this tiny school any longer, and opted to go to the crummy local high school just to see different people around me. I didn't learn a damn thing- I coasted along on my middle school education- but it was much better for me socially. Obviously I would have preferred to have had a continuing great education and been able to be myself, but as much as education means to me now, I shudder to imagine staying in that small, excellent, but soul crushing school.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:52 PM on June 24

I went to public school in upstate New York, in a district that was ranked (while I was attending, no less) in the top 20 according to Newsweek or Time or some such publication for best public schools in the country to prepare your child for competitive college. Two nearby suburbs had their districts in the Top 50 too; one was in the Top 10, mostly because it was so wealthy (locally, most people considered my district more intellectually rigorous...less "Mommy called up the superintendent and got that score waived" etc stuff). They factored in AP availability and ratio of students who achieved 5s or whatever, etc etc. And they were right! My parents didn't pay for my high school education and in fact saved over a year's worth in college tuition; I entered university with over a year's worth of college credit under my belt thanks to those APs. So sending me to that public school saved my parents many, many thousands of dollars (hypothetical dollars, even--I got a full ride scholarship to university too).

It was the best education I could ever imagine or dream up. A lot's gone wrong in my life, small and sometimes larger, but the one thing I feel was rock solid in every way was my early education. Nobody can ever take that gift from me, and I will always be grateful for it and humbled.

I had amazing teachers who had very high standards; a lot of those teachers mean just as much to me when I think about my intellectual achievements as my very favorite professors. And I will say with a straight face I worked harder in high school than I ever did in college--more was expected of me. Moving cities and talking to people elsewhere has been a bit of a shock to me; it took a while for me to realize my public education experience was hardly standard or normal. It's been a little overwhelming actually, the mixture of years-later amazement and gratitude that wells up inside me along with the disenchantment and concern for any future children I have. I just sort of naively hoped it'd be the same for them. It probably won't be that simple.
posted by ifjuly at 2:18 PM on June 24

I went to a completely crappy rural high school where I didn't learn a thing. Then I went to a fancy pants college and excelled and learned tons. If you expect the school to do the teaching, I suppose that you might care that the school is good or bad. But I'm on your side, the library card, museum trips and occasional college course (I took math one summer at the community college when I was 11, for fun!) will more than make up for whatever is lacking in the local public school.

The school doesn't really matter, just teach your kids at home to be motivated to learn.
posted by dipolemoment at 4:01 PM on June 24

I graduated nearly 10 years ago from a small public school (less than 150 kids in the high school) with a reputation for mediocrity. The school received average funding, the building was outdated (we had a cafetorium--a cafeteria/auditorium hybrid), and they had average classes (English, math, science, band, computer science, etc.). Think Dillon High School from Friday Night Lights, but smaller. Same kind of blue-collar, small-town atmosphere, too.

When my parents moved to the district, they knew the school's reputation and considered putting me into private school. They decided to give the school a shot, and I'm so glad they did.

Academically, high school did not prepare me well for college. I sailed through high school, got a scholarship to a prestigious liberal arts college, attended said college and received a rough wake up call--the way I studied and took tests and wrote papers in high school was not gonna fly here. It was no biggie. I manned up, changed, and very quickly got As in college, too.

What my school did give me was a nurturing environment to grow up in. While our school had a couple of bullies and some kids drank and did drugs and some girls got pregnant, most kids were ok. While there were definitely groups, there were no cliques--jocks were in band, the kids who wrote the newspaper also starred in the play, etc. There was a real sense of community because, to get anything done, you had to cooperate with people you might not normally. I'm not saying it was a utopia, just that, for the most part, kids were nice and civil to each other. I made amazing friends that I'm still close to, despite the fact that we've nearly all moved to different cities and states.

About half the kids went to a community college, a quarter didn't go to college at all, and a quarter went to university. Most kids became happy and successful, in their own way.

While some of the teachers weren't good at teaching, most were good about caring for and about students. Nearly every teacher was a coach or a director or in charge of some extra-curricular activity. Very few kids fell through the cracks simply because there were so few cracks.

So, yes, I'd pay more attention to actual environment than reputation. I'd also consider size. Sure, my school's size and lack of funding limited the kinds of classes I could take or the extracurriculars I could go, but I never missed them. I loved my small school, and most of my classmates did, too.
posted by Tall Telephone Pea at 4:48 PM on June 24