momof4 on Westchester County's missing private school

It sounds as if there might be a market in Westchester County for a private school that stressed real phonics, spelling, grammar, composition, high-quality fiction and non-fiction, real (Singapore etc.) math, serious content across all disciplines (CK or Wise Bauer's classical), explicit teaching to mastery, homogeneous grouping by subject, immediate help for struggling students and allowing/encouraging acceleration. With the existing demographics, I'd think kids would soar to great heights with that kind of program (without outside tutoring!) and class sizes could probably be larger than at public schools, with no problems.

That's what I've been wondering. That's why I asked the question about cheap private schools.

homeschooling co-ops as cheap private schools

Crimson Wife wrote:

There is a new full-time homeschooling co-op starting next year in my area. Basically the parents wanted to start a private school without having to worry about all the red tape of officially making it a school. They're charging $400/mo., which is less than half of what the typical secular private school around here costs.

Steve H wrote:

Is it possible to have a homeschool that doesn't inlcude your own kids, and to charge money? Is a "homeschooling co-op" a particular thing defined by the state?

I've always thought that group homeschools could be a great way to try out or start up a private school. Maybe that's all you ever need. Many parents are willing and able to teach certain subjects. You could pool resources to buy a van. You can take advantage of town and state-sponsored sports and music opportunities. You could be done with academics by noon.

However, I can't imagine that states would allow this to go very far, not because they don't think they will work, but because they might work too well.

I have also thought that an inexpensive, but very rigorous, college was possible. Just provide excellent teaching and keep overhead low. Professors would just teach, but they would have to teach at least 4 courses. Back when I taught math and CS full time at a college, we had a number of adjunct teachers who had regular jobs in industry. Some were leaders in their area. They wanted to teach even thought they were paid next to nothing.

What about homeschools where some of the classes are taught in the evening when many parents are available? It's more useful than baking cookies for the PTA. Parents and non-educators have a whole lot to offer academically, but they are kept out. That adds a lot to the cost.

It's nice to think of ways around the system, not ways to fix the system. Talking about the CCSSI standards is a lose-lose proposition.

Crimson Wife wrote:

Here in CA, there is no such thing under the state ed code as "homeschooling". HS kids are either enrolled in a private school (can be a single-family one or an ISP like Calvert or Seton), a public school (including virtual charters and district ISP's), or are tutored (there are very strict requirements and it's mostly child actors & athletes who do this).

I'm not 100% sure, but I would presume the students in the co-op would be legally enrolled in private schools established by their parents. There are a number of private school regulations that specifically exempt single-family schools.

The parents are free to pool their resources and hire a teacher, rent a meeting space, purchase curricula and supplies, etc. This happens frequently but typically the co-ops are part-time. The difference with this new one is that it would be 5 full-days.

Amy P wrote:

Our kids' school is about $6k a year for elementary with class sizes around 12 and separate art, music, Spanish and PE teachers. However, it's in Texas, it started as a free homeschool co-op, it's right next to a college and draws on graduate students to teach courses (like Aristotelian logic for 8th graders!), a lot of teachers have kids at the school, and the they aren't paid a bunch. The upper grades are more expensive. The high school is still a work in progress (we only have up to 10th grade right now). I still don't know if it's going to be practical to run a high school on such a small scale. I'm committed to sending our kids there until the end of 8th grade, but I'm waiting to see how the high school does. For all I know, our kids may eventually want to swim in a bigger pond with more extracurricular options. We have two kids now and basically manage on one good (but not lawyer or doctor good) salary. We have one paid-off car and we still rent. I don't know how we would pay for three or four kids in private school at the same time, but I will cross that bridge when/if I get to it.

Vicky S wrote:

Here is my idea for the homeschooling community: a homeschool center that operates during the day, say 8-5. Combination day care, tutoring center, homework help, community center, play date venue, library, computer access, exercise space, study hall, group project staging area...everything under one roof. Parent stays 100% in charge of homeschooling, but can make use of facilities, work a PT job or get to a doctor's appt. Can pay by the hour or the day, drop in or regular. You're not a school, and the government is not involved--but you provide some infrastructure that allows homeschooling to flourish in your community.

Matthew on cheap private schools

This is what it looks like:

Two Million Minutes

... for about $7k per pupil, I believe.

BASIS Tuscon

RMD on cheap private schools

Bob Luddy, who started the Franklin Academy charter school in Raleigh, founded a series of private schools, Thales Academy. The tuition was $5K a few years ago, and I believe his costs are in the $6,500 range. Franklin Academy averages 1 year and 4 months of achievement for every single academic year on the areas measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills.

Also, Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy gets about $6,800 per child to educate their children, and has amazing results (check out their CSAP scores online). Their high school was number 1 in the state in 2007.

If you really just want to educate kids, it's not nearly as expensive as if you have other goals in mind.

cheap private schools - ?

I've been wondering about something.

Is there a way to create cheap private schools?

Relatively cheap, I mean?

Relatively cheap private schools middle-class parents would be willing to pay for -----

I'm asking today because I just came across this passage from an editorial by Paul Peterson while scouring the internet for more spending x scores graphs:

Universal public high school is relatively new in this country. As late as 1900, more than two-thirds of all US high-school graduates got their diploma from private schools; public schools were turning out only 62,000 graduates a year. In later decades, school districts expanded the "public option" in education; by 1960, 90 percent of high-school age students were enrolled. When something is free, people will use it.

Today, though, only about 10 percent of elementary and secondary students attend a private school. Private schools now attract only two kinds of families: 1) the well-to-do, who are willing to pay the high cost of private schooling; and 2) those seeking to preserve their religious traditions.

Anything available on the cheap will drive out the more expensive -- except for those with hefty wallets or strong convictions.

Health lessons from schools
Paul E. Peterson
New York Post

fyi: Yes, this passage comes from an editorial about the health care bill (back when the public option was still on the table), but that's not the point.

The point is: the cheap drives out the expensive. I'd never heard it put so succinctly.

Public schools are fantastically expensive ($30K per pupil in my district last school year). Yes, we have special education and a zillion mandates, but from my perspective one of the main reasons public schools are fantastically expensive is that constructivism costs an arm and a leg.

If you're running a constructivist school, you have to have tiny little classes so the kids can work in groups without the decibel level breaking the sound barrier; you have to have mixed-ability classrooms because.....well, just because, which means kids move through the curriculum at a snail's pace; you have to have spiraling curricula which also means kids move through the curriculum at a snail's pace; you have to have SMART Boards and laptops and Smart Phones and lord knows what else because it's the 21st century; you have to have literacy specialists and math specialists because the failure rate with balanced literacy and fuzzy math is high; you have to have lots of parent reteaching at night and/or parent hiring of tutors because the kids aren't great at discovering and constructing knowledge.... I could go on.

I've been thinking about "cheap private schools" ever since reading about the Knowledge Schools in Sweden. It's true that, technically, a cheap private school costs more than a public school, but when you contemplate the many costs of getting a slow, fuzzy education instead of a fast, coherent education, the money you'd spend on a 'cheap private school' might start to look like a bargain.

A year ago I was talking about the issue of school spending and quality with a friend, and I said, "A good education costs less; a bad education costs more."

She pointed out that this principle is true on two levels: the school budget but also the life of the child. A bad education costs the child.

Suppose you put together a bare bones K-5 or K-8 school with the fundamentals parents want....

Could you do it?

What would it look like?