Dept. of Education study: Catholic H.S. Students Twice as Likely to Graduate College

Some interesting results from a study seems to indicate a wide margin of "final education status" between High School students that attend a Catholic HS vs a Public HS.

The study shows 62% of Catholic HS students actually get a college degree while only 32% of public school students do.

And, students who had been enrolled in non-Catholic private schools, 57% had gone on to earn at least a bachelor’s degree.


What seems to be the big difference?

Money? Quality of Teachers? Anything else?

Why would that be a main factor?

read the article for other data;

Students who attended Catholic high schools were approximately twice as likely as students who attended public high schools to go on and graduate from college, according to a new report from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics.

According to the report, 61.9 percent of Catholic high school students went on to earn a bachelor’s degree or higher by the time they were 8 years out of high school. By contrast, only 31.1 percent of public school students had gone on to earn a bachelor’s degree or higher.

The report— “Educational Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002): A First Look at 2002 High School Sophomores 10 Year Later” —looks at the results of a survey NCES did of a representatives sample of 13,133 Americans who were sophomores in high school in 2002. NCES first surveyed these individuals in 2002, when they were sophomores; then again in 2004, when they were high schools seniors; then again in 2006 when they were two years out of high school; and then again from July 2012 to February 2013, when they were approximately 8 years out of high school.



Dept. of Ed: Catholic H.S. Students Twice as Likely to Graduate College

---------------

reply to post by xuenchen


What don't kill ya - makes you stronger ?

reply to post by xuenchen


I went to a Catholic HS and the emphasis was very much on college prep. We wrote four term papers a year and read eight books a year. When I got to college, I was surprised by how many other students couldn't write worth a bean. Not that I am Nobel Laureate in literature or anything but the fundamentals of how to write a paper were drilled into our heads and practiced over and over.

reply to post by xuenchen


Well I wouldn't rule out the possibility that a portion of those students went to Catholic Universities.

List of Universities

But generally I would say money would be the biggest contributor. That includes additional scholarships.

Grimpachi
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Well I wouldn't rule out the possibility that a portion of those students went to Catholic Universities.

List of Universities

But generally I would say money would be the biggest contributor. That includes additional scholarships.

edit on 10-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

Private schools tend to spend less per pupil than public schools. The problem is that many of those funds are wasted by a huge bureaucracy. In addition, parents who have to write a check for their kid's tuition tend to be much more involved with both the school and their children. Also, competition between private schools and teachers without tenure of unions enable the cram to rise to the top.

I'd say the issue is multifactorial.

reply to post by SirMike


Practice makes perfect.

I always thought so.

Grimpachi
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Well I wouldn't rule out the possibility that a portion of those students went to Catholic Universities.

List of Universities

But generally I would say money would be the biggest contributor. That includes additional scholarships.

edit on 10-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

Perhaps money for sure.

But why hasn't many public school systems been able to use the money they get effectively?

I wonder what the money ratios are between public/private high schools?

And I wonder why it appears that the public universities are lagging behind?

reply to post by Grimpachi


Money isn't the issue.

My nephew graduated from Fenwick High School in Oak Park Il a few years back. His tuition is Sr year (2010) was $11,300. The local high school, Oak Park and River Forest High School District 200, spent nearly $20,000 per pupil in 2010.

Another apples to apples is Benet Academy in Lisle illinois. Tuition is $9950 per year and they had a composite ACT average of 28.7. Lisle High School spends $16,540 per pupil with an average composite ACT of 22.3.

Public schools soak a lot of their money by the time they pay for the top heavy bureaucracy and mandated teacher pay in union contracts that's often spent on subpar, tenured teachers. There isn't much left per pupil by the time it gets to the level of the students.

Private schools have the earn it. If they screwed around with it like public schools did, no one would voluntarily send their kids there or pay that money to them and they wouldn't exist anymore.

For example, it's been noted that DC Public schools spend upwards of $20,000 of so per pupil per year. By contrast, Sidwell's tuition is around $22,000 to $24,000 per year. That's only a few thousand in difference, but you can't look at the average educational experience of a kid in a DC Public school and the President's daughters and tell me there's only a few thousands dollars difference there. They are worlds apart.

And it's in the management and the way their separate structuring allow them to get away with being managed more than it is in the funding.

reply to post by xuenchen

But why hasn't many public school systems been able to use the money they get effectively?

When has the United States government ever demonstrated that it was more efficient, in anything, than the private sector is?

adjensen
reply to post by xuenchen

 

But why hasn't many public school systems been able to use the money they get effectively?

When has the United States government ever demonstrated that it was more efficient, in anything, than the private sector is?

Exactly. The government doesn't need to earn your business or maintain a bottom line. It just takes what it needs no matter how poorly it does and mandates you use it.

Until private business can do that, it has to convince you that it's worth your time and money which is why it has to be effective.

reply to post by xuenchen


Parents.. Those who send their kids to a better school are more likely to be involved and supportive to their kids..

It is the millions of troubled, mostly inner city kids that have issues. Many of them are raised by a ghetto type parent.

Just as charter school kids are more likely to graduate. Higher number of involved supportive parents.

Public school is "free day care" to many drug addict parents who view it as freedom from kids to get their party on.

NavyDoc

Grimpachi
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Well I wouldn't rule out the possibility that a portion of those students went to Catholic Universities.

List of Universities

But generally I would say money would be the biggest contributor. That includes additional scholarships.

edit on 10-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

Private schools tend to spend less per pupil than public schools. The problem is that many of those funds are wasted by a huge bureaucracy. In addition, parents who have to write a check for their kid's tuition tend to be much more involved with both the school and their children. Also, competition between private schools and teachers without tenure of unions enable the cram to rise to the top.

I'd say the issue is multifactorial.

I had a friend who taught music and drama in a private school. Some students just refused to participate in lessons and her hands were tied because they'd just tell her that there's no way the school will discipline or, get rid of them because of the large contribution of money their parents made. She got so fed up with the bad attitude of many of her students that she left the job. She got no help from other teachers or the head teacher because they all feared for their jobs if they kicked up a fuss and lost the school that monetary contribution.

Also, my son attends Catholic school, in the UK, and I think one of the main differences is that they tend to look at the child as whole rather than just ramming the academic curriculum down their throats. My friend's children who don't attend Catholic school are just constantly reminded of the need to achieve good results without any consideration as to whether each child is academic, or not. My son's school still have to follow the curriculum but still find time to teach the children respect for themselves and others, basic good manners, etc. My friend's children's schools just complain that they don't have the time or resources. I think the general difference in the attitudes of the schools plays a big part. One places great emphasis on a 'can do' attitude and the other great emphasis on 'can't do' because of lack. Probably extra funds from the Diocese and donations from Catholic parents, helps too.

SirMike
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

Money isn't the issue.

My nephew graduated from Fenwick High School in Oak Park Il a few years back. His tuition is Sr year (2010) was $11,300. The local high school, Oak Park and River Forest High School District 200, spent nearly $20,000 per pupil in 2010.

Another apples to apples is Benet Academy in Lisle illinois. Tuition is $9950 per year and they had a composite ACT average of 28.7. Lisle High School spends $16,540 per pupil with an average composite ACT of 22.3.

edit on 10-2-2014 by SirMike because: (no reason given)

Great Points

p.s.) I know quite a few guys that went to Fenwick !!
I went to OPRF (long time ago)

reply to post by xuenchen

Haven't they always performed better than public schools?

Bone75
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Haven't they always performed better than public schools?

I imagine so.

I'm interested in finding the reasons and why the public systems have apparently failed.

HanzHenry
Public school is "free day care" to many drug addict parents who view it as freedom from kids to get their party on.

"Early Childhood Development" serves the same purpose. I hate watching someone in a BMW drop their one year old off at "school" just so they can return to their 7am porch party.

reply to post by xuenchen


Anyone who has gone to both Catholic schools and Public schools will tell you: Public schools are a joke. Worse than a joke, it's honestly really sad and pathetic how bad public schools are.

Though I will admit that Catholic schools will always have higher college attendance purely from an economic factor.. those families usually are in a better economic position.

reply to post by xuenchen


Comparing private schools to public schools is a joke. Private schools have selective enrollment. If any student has a disciplinary problem or isn't making the grade, they can easily be kicked out and told to enroll into a public school. In addition, corporal discipline is still used in private schools, so students there have consequences when they misbehave or disrupt classes. Most children who attend private schools come from homes whose parents are college educated (hence role models), and the majority of them are not growing up in poverty. Compare statistics on how many learning support students are enrolled in public schools as compared to private schools. Our local high school alone has 28 percent enrolled in learning support and 78 percent of our students come from poverty stricken homes, run down neighborhoods, street gangs and crime infested neighborhoods.

Even in athletics, private high schools dangle free tuition to outstanding athletes in public schools. They strip public schools of a lot of their star athletes, and ignore the effects it has on public school athletics. In the mean time, they will look away and carry a below average star athlete as long as it benefits their sports program. It's why their athletic programs are always extremely competitive and successful. Any school who has selective enrollment will always out perform schools who must select any student who walks in their doors.

Public schools and private schools are not on an even keel. Anyone who thinks they are, hasn't experienced both sides of the coin.

I think most of you misunderstood when I said money was one of the biggest factors.

I am not talking about the cost of highschool I am talking about the cost of university.

Most of the people I knew and know who went to private school which went on to University had family who could front the bill or at least help in some shape or form.

Of course there are ways for many to continue on to college without the help of family. For me it was simple as serving 4 years in the Army first.

Yes money is an issue for those who do not have it.