Because I've written on private schools, I get hits looking for the "best private schools" in the Bay Area.
That question is not answerable. Why? Because ranking schools -- good, better, best -- overlooks the fundamental feature of independent schools. Each one is different. The correct question is, which school is the best fit for your child?
It is hard to see, in this age where California public schools are ranked by Academic Performance Index (API) scores. Homes change value -- sometimes by tens of thousands of dollars -- based on those scores.
If the public schools are ranked, goes the thought, why shouldn't the private schools be ranked also?
The public schools, however, have a different mission. Public schools have to educate everyone who comes in the door. They are answerable to school boards and in the end, the state.
The National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS) has a public position on ranking schools:
With this, as with all questions related to elementary and secondary education, we must keep our focus on the children's best interests. The National Association of Independent Schools is and always has been opposed to the ranking of schools. The "best" school— public, parochial, or independent— is the one that uniquely meets the needs of each particular child.
Robert Kennedy at About.com has written an article on why private schools shouldn't be ranked.
EduFax answer to "What are the academic rankings of the private prep high schools in the USA?"
PrepReview does rank schools based on admittance to the highly-selective colleges.
Bay Area Private Schools says,
There is no ranking on private elementary schools. Since the key to a rewarding private school education is finding a good match for your child's specific needs, parents should not make their decision solely based on test scores and reputation.
Update August 4, 2005 Additional national school organization condemns the ranking mania:
MAGAZINE 'REVIEWS' and SCHOOL RANKINGS
National Association of Principals of Schools for Girls (NAPSG) POSITION STATEMENT
Approved by Council: 2/27/05
Approved by Membership: 2/27/05
Various publishers are producing 'guidebooks' or devoting entire issues to the review of private schools. The books purportedly "will consist of profiles that comprise the opinions of students, alumni, and parents, as well as data reported by school administrators".
Once a school is 'selected' for inclusion, the magazines plan to ask school administrators to help survey the opinions of its students, alumni, and parents of current students. It is the combination of these opinions and the data reported that would drive the profile of each school.
NAPSG, the National Association of Principals of Schools for Girls joins with NAIS (the National Association of Independent Schools), TABS (the Association of Boarding Schools), CAIS (our sister Canadian Association of Independent Schools) and AISNE (The Association of Independent Schools in New England) in recommending that schools not cooperate in such projects.
NAPSG is opposed to the ranking of schools. The best school-- public, parochial, or independent-- is the one that uniquely meets the needs of each particular child. Ranking misrepresents the institutions, misleads consumer-minded parents about the factors that should be considered in the complex process of choosing a school, but most importantly, could lead to an inappropriate choice.
Each NAPSG member school will make its own decision regarding participation and how to communicate that decision proactively to its constituents, however, we encourage you not to cooperate with this or similar projects.
William Bennett has an article suggesting that parents look at each school's accreditation as a way of judging the total quality of the school's program.
The ranking mania is also fueled by a marketing ploy developed by the publication U.S. News & World Report publishes several
issues ranking colleges and universites (and hospitals and other). One
cogent critique of the magazine's ranking system was published by Glenn Kersten in January 2000. Another was published in Washington Monthly by Nicholas Thompson (Sept. 2000). A more scholarly critique of the ranking game was published by Tamara Holub in 2002.
Comments