> > The elites send their kids to institutions
> > which are just as totalizing and dehumanizing
> > as the KIPP schools; but the grounds look
> > nicer
>
> Well.....I do know what you mean, I do. But still.
> The elite schools have labs, and music, and arts,
> and foreign language, and history, and exchange programs.
As long as some people are richer than others, they'll enjoy more amenities than others. But is this really more consequential than the grounds looking nicer? How many graduates of the elite schools have derived any real benefit from the labs, music, etc.? Far as I can tell they mostly become lawyers, or inherit Dad's real-estate business.
> The KIPP schools have bubble tests and, increasingly,
> unqualified teachers
You don't have to have any "qualifications" at all to teach in an elite private school -- which is probably another advantage, come to think of it, since the "qualifications" required of a public school teacher are so silly. Though one has seen some shocking specimens in the elite schools -- people whom one would rather see behind bars than in a classroom. But then the same is true in the public schools.
And the elite schools are just as crazed about standardized testing as the publics are. Have been for years.
The elite schools are not a Great Good Place, except for kids who would do well with any teaching at all, or with none at all. But the elite schools can recruit and retain those kids, and winnow out the rest.
> It's not quite the same.
Not quite, to be sure. But there's more in common than you might think, once you get past the nice grounds and the flawless orthodontia.
-- --
Michael J. Smith mjs at smithbowen.net
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://www.cars-suck.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com