patrick.net

Fisk, time has changed.

I was one of those FOB immigrant workers who excelled in my home country (top school top scores in my country) who started my career here after attending graduate school. My competition was mainly local Americans from very average high schools and colleges. Not any more for my kids. My kids are competing against offsprings of people like myself from their countries, and since we all thrived through education, we place enormous focus on education for our next generation. The Silly Valley is extremely concentrated with overachievers from all over the world, and there is no reason to think that their kids should be inherently mediocre.

Also, the mobility among classes in America has been going down in the last few decades. One of the few ways that are still open to worker bees (ok, some well paid worker bees) to ascend in the social ladder is through education. To be frank, education is probably the only way to keep them from losing ground.

I am not saying that I will pay $35K for private school, if my kids prove to me that they are really talented, that is how much I am willing to spend. Otherwise, a solid public school is the way to go. But if I do shell out $35K per year on private school tuition, I expect only the best college placement and the best career path to justify my "investment".

tatupu says: I thought Chairman Mao died.

he was assassinated by your handlers.

@chubbuni138016

I had a similar experience of going to a “top” public high school and through apathy not doing too well. Then finding myself doing better in college than top students from “lesser” high schools.

I felt that the tough high school gave me a leg up for when I was ready to apply myself. Even half-assing it, I think that my high school taught me a strong ground work of study skills that I would have missed out on if I had been an apathetic student at a lower ranked school.

So I think that regardless of the interest/ability of the child a top school is a benefit.

That said…

@OO

I know people who went to very expensive private schools (high school and college) and floundered their way into their 30’s without much career direction or success.

I totally agree that I would expect my kids to apply themselves and have direction, in their chosen career, if I was going to spend that much on private school.

Hmm... you missed one of the options ... buy 700k and go to private (immersion) school. That's what i'd do if i was you.

OO says

Any private school is way better than the best public school? I would beg to differ. Care to share the college enrollment data (particularly at high selective colleges) of these Catholic schools? I asked, because I checked, a total misery, worse than an average public high school. I don’t want to spend $15K tuition on a kid so that he can go to Foothill College.
Lots of private schools (eg. the chain schools that I won’t name the names) are VERY mediocre. I won’t send my kids to any private high schools with a tuition less than $30K, because they are just a rip off for what they offer.

@OO, How do you check the college enrollment data? I don't mean it as a snarky question. I'm really interested in this. Is there any website that makes this data available?

Schools are a reflection of the area and people that live near them. I’d rather spend more on a house in a good area/school district than some lousy area to save some on mortgage and pay through the nose for private school.

I have enough friends that regret where they bought now because of all the hassles driving there kids far to schools where they have to lie and use friends addresses, or paying for private. Not to mention when the kids are out of school your still in a bad area and have to keep your kids on lockdown or in the little pocket that might be ok.

onfence,

for Harker and various top public schools in the Bay Area, it is on their website, you just need to comb through the scattered data. There are some tricks though. Harker, for example, tried to inflate their placement data by publishing "acceptance" instead of "enrollment", because one top student can be accepted by multiple top colleges. Therefore you must compare apples to apples. For the cheaper private schools, they don't even dare to publish their miserable placement, but you can call them directly. My experience is, don't bother. Save that $15K and rent a bigger house in a good public school district.

So far, the best enrollment for the higher-tier colleges which range from the better UCs to Ivies are from (no surprise!), MSJ, Gunn, Monta Vista, Lynbrook, PALY, Saratoga and Los Altos. Harker sends probably only 1-2 more to Ivies each year compared to the top tier public schools, which is why I don't think it is worth the money. Harker also sends quite a few students to Foothill and De Anza, which to me, is a total failure on its $30K+ tuition.

So if my kids prove to me that they are indeed talented, I will be looking at Polytechnic, College Prep, or some boarding schools on the east coast rather than the overpriced, performance-challenged private schools of the South Bay area for my $35K.

Mark_LA says

Fisk says

I am truly trying to understand (esp. as I now have a small child)

Stick your kid in the worst school in East San Jose & they’ll graduate Valedictorian. The problem is that when they actually attend our university system (unlike our K-12 schools, our universities are the best in the world), they’ll have trouble keeping up with the rest of the kids there.
Because they’re surrounded by kids that perform at less than what they should, they’re not challenged to reach a higher level of learning…after all, they’re getting A’s in their AP Calculus AB class in 12th Grade, so they believe they]re the big dog on campus. They don’t find out that they’re behind until they attend college and find out other students were taking Ap Calculus BC in the 11th grade….all of a sudden they understand they were just a big fish in the little pond at their low API High School.

And so? I never had AP classes (no such thing in Russia then), and my wife has no idea what calculus is.

My point is that it's not that hard to get to ~100 - 150 K/year income (meaning ~250 K HHI) and ~1 M net worth by age 40 after going to very mediocre public HS and state uni. That's not even in CA, but in WA where we have a good-size new house on a golf course 10 min. from work for 300 K (with 2.6 K in prop. taxes) and no state income tax.

That's not to boast at all: many people do better, some by much. This is just what we were able to from the low start we had. No big deal, really: we daily read (some with indignation) about police/firefighters/prison guards/paramedics who pull in over 100 K and retire at 50 - 55 with ~80% salary in lifetime pension with COLA. I doubt many went to Harvard Westlake, did they?

Just need to: choose a stable practical career direction (such as nursing, pharmacy, engineering, law enforcement) early and stick to it, graduate quickly and start working wasting no time, have discipline to show up and do everything on time and as required to get good (not even necessarily excellent) grades, not screw with anyone, be willing to work over time/nights/weekends and move as needed, marry with care (not based on the length of legs or size of biceps), diligently save.

If your top-rated college prep HS leading to HYPS (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford I guess?) got your kids to a far higher orbit in life, great for you/them and you've invested wisely. Did it? If yes, could you tell us? Is it representative of their class?
I can afford 35 K/yr for my only child's HS education, in fact fairly easily. But I didn't get where I am in life (starting from a Soviet factory town, as I said) by spending money and time on frivolities.

And no, Mark_LA, our colleges (on average) are by no means best in the world. The top 5 - 10% of them are, just like the top ~5 - 10% of HS.
If you go from a low-tier HS to top-tier college (by virtue of athletic scholarship, legacy, AA, or such), sure you are bound to have problems.

In all due respect although I lean libertarian I can't see that much of a reason to go to a private school. To make the argument that any high school prepaires people for colleges and universities is iffy at best. It's hard to judge high schools on the same pattern because one could say it is the teachers and not the institution as a whole that does the educaition. I don't believe I had much for bad teachers while in high school (maybe one). While in college I find it laughable some of the arguments for private school as classroom sizes are small. Attention is there.

It can be argued that private colleges/universities often can have lower standards than public. What gets students in the door is grades and money. So in a economic downturn what does a private school do to increase enrollement? Lower the price? nope..raise the price? probably not..they lower the standards. It also can be interesting to see how some majors do in different graduate schools because it can be fire and brimstone. The very mission statement of some private schools isn't even education but other intents. Religious schools are fine but that teaches more to be a better Christian, Jew, Moslem etc. In addition if someone transfers from those schools into a non religious one there is only so many credits that can be taken. I've overheard a conversation by one that is a full year behind because religious classes cannot be accepted for anything other than electives.

FAFSA basically makes higher education cost more as it subsidizes the demand. If demand is subsidized but supply isn't it drives up prices over and over again.
I wouldn't bet on that retirement at 50-55 with 80% of lifetime pension with cola. Unions are dying out. I can pm you about something rather personal with that.

I don't mean to kinda poke but have you asked your kids where they want to go ?

Fisk says

I can afford 35 K/yr for my only child’s HS education, in fact fairly easily. But I didn’t get where I am in life (starting from a Soviet factory town, as I said) by spending money and time on frivolities.

good for you. You pretty much said the same things that ressonates with the indians, chinese, korean, japenese cultures or any other cultures, in which the people knows the value of money, who had a very modest upbringing, and wanted to achieve a better life.

Actually your kid won't get into the top tier colleges by being a Valedictorian in an East San Jose or Richmond school. It is in fact very hard for these Valedictorian to get into a top-tier college. I have a good friend who was a director of admission for a major ivy. She told me this is how it works.

HS needs to be calibrated, per se. Which means, the college will look at the former graduates from a particular HS that were admitted, track their performance in college, and determine how trustworthy a 4.0 GPA at such a HS is. The feeder schools, both public and private, are obviously "proven" HS with trustworthy GPAs. If a HS rarely sent or has never sent anyone into a highly coveted college, the GPAs and recommendation letters will be looked upon with much suspicion and discount. Hence, the top student from such a HS must prove himself in other wider-scale contests so that the admission committee knows that his stellar performance on paper is not just a reflection of how crappy his peers are. In other words, when Stanford looks like the applicants, a 4.0 GPA at Gunn is not the same thing as a 4.0 GPA at an East San Jose HS.

It appears to me this question is all about buying into or having a false sense of reality on both counts of education and housing. This is a real estate forum so I won't go into my views on education both public and private today. In my opinion it is this exact mentality that is precisely what got real estate and education into its current mess to begin with today. The last post by 00 such outlined the utter bullshit and gross manipulation and prejudice used to obtain a high priced ticket to a private university for a future that is not determined by it. There are many Ivy grads working regular jobs or no job at all. I have many Ivy grad friends who could not whip their own asses if their lives depended on it. So many other factors come into play for both housing and education. This forum may not be the place for this.

what you need to teach your kids is that whatever they do they should be completely confident in that.
They shouldn't feel inferior to anyone, neither they should feel that they are superior to anyone in terms of money, brainpower or anything else- They are just unique, God never makes carbon copies.

I remember this when i was growing up, some kids were extremely rich , some were poorer than me- I was somewhere in the middle. I learnt an important lesson to make right choices in life.
Some people live in shabby condos/townhouses or Busy roads just so that their kids can goto cupertino (or some other hyped up ) school but not me- I can tell you
these people are setting their kids up for an inferiority complex.

I'm not saying goto the crappiest of the neghbourhoods, Go live in some neighbourhood where schools are still nice (for example greater than 800 API)
but at the same time you can afford a home instead of a townhome. Infact years back people were not able to afford in Saratoga that is when they started to buy in
cupertino. I bought in cambrian for same reasons, safe neighbourhood and great schools (more than 800 API for all) but yet at the same time I don't have the stress
of a more than million dollar mortgage if i would have bought in cupertino- that means i can spend more time with my kids.

I would say again, Look in 95124 - It's a great neighbourhood and it's not overpriced.

cloud13 says

I would say again, Look in 95124 - It’s a great neighbourhood and it’s not overpriced.

yes, indeed.

There was an interesting concept about a group of like, education minded parents just getting together and moving to a lesser, school (living each in their own homes) and making enough effort to "raise the learning atmosphere" of the said school. This effect might in turn even have an effect on the property values...

Thanks chip_designer.

Where are you Menya ?? you stirred up lot of emotions. Give us fedback about what you are thinking.

OO is completely out of touch from reality.

SF ace says

very Google and Facebook recent gard employees are Ivy League, MIT caliber credentials with rare exceptions.

you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to facebook, google employees.

SF ace says

* Employers are a lot pickier now than 10 years ago. 10 years ago, medicore education credential led to a decent start and subsequently you can do the right things to advance in your career. Today, that mediocre credentials don’t even get a look at the resume screener. In 10-20 years, I expect things to be even more competitive. Don’t look at your 40 something colleague going to a second tier college as inspiration, every Google and Facebook recent gard employees are Ivy League, MIT caliber credentials with rare exceptions. This is going to spill over to other major corporations doing high level work.

Bullshit! for a bunch of medicore employees from 70s-80s-90s did far better creating 400+ public companies
than the snubish pricks from Ivy Leage and MIT anyday.

What do you have to call your own.. Advertising companies !! FB and Google Wow im impressed!

SF Ace, you want to feel unique with high self-esteem , i would never want that my kid is the wost in thier peers- it's a recipe for disaster.

SF ace says

San Jose State relative to Stanford is not.

You have no idea what your talking about. SV workers back than and even today are mainly SJSU grads. SJSU did far more putting many professionals into the SV from Engineering to Marketing, Production and Finance. And they still do today.

Your gonna compare some arrogant prick ass snob advertising and gaming companies to the vast number of serious hardware and software industries that created the technology/information revolution which were run by grads from local medicore universities.

Is that what your saying! Like I said Impress me!

we are digressing from the topic :

Should you be crazy about 900+ API or anything above 800 is considered good ?

I think 800+ proves that school is good enough and then it's upto the students and parents to do the rest. Everything else is a hype.

bearishbull says

I don’t know what SF Ace is smoking, but most of my colleagues now do not have Ivy League degrees

thank you for bringing a little common sense to this thread.

* Employers are a lot pickier now than 10 years ago. 10 years ago, medicore education credential led to a decent start and subsequently you can do the right things to advance in your career. Today, that mediocre credentials don’t even get a look at the resume screener. In 10-20 years, I expect things to be even more competitive. Don’t look at your 40 something colleague going to a second tier college as inspiration, every Google and Facebook recent gard employees are Ivy League, MIT caliber credentials with rare exceptions. This is going to spill over to other major corporations and professional firms doing high level work."

SF you are all over the place here. I've only seen one employer even ask for a GPA and then I searched about them and the vast majority of the information was negative (they offered me a job and to pay for relocation to the midwest). I emailed them to address the concerns brought up in said websites but as of yet they haven't.

Employers can be picky but I think you are taking this into a different direction. This is what I see already
Drug tests - since the 80's this has been true. In a sense all of the hippies of the 60's and 70's had to clean up to get jobs

Background checks - have you been involved in a crime? That can kill you economically

Credit checks (some states have made this illegal) - those that owe money are more likely to steal than ones that don't have debt. Which means they might actually be less likely to get a job. Educational loans are economic death sentences.

Sometimes times can change. I went to a school where the accrediations were a bit iffy. Then they changed..BOOM! All of the schools in the state would now take their credits..it was that simple.

I will admit that Google is the only company I've seen that has a Ph.d for a requirement but they never specifically stated from what school.

"I really articulate the point unclearly."

I think you meant "I really articulateD the point unclearly"

The other thing to remember is that many good professors at ivy league schools and others are adjuct and teach at other schools. I've had one twice that also teaches at MIT. Does anyone honestly think he makes things harder just because it is ivy league? Certainly it is more dependent on the level (102 classes 205, 340, 420 class etc) then the institution.

The comradery that people have with higher education usually goes like this.
"So you went to xyz....what professors did you have"

To discount the professors is to totally discount the entire degree. I have much more in common with actual classmates then people that were not in my classes but in the same graduation year.

As for Facebook they are private and there's no legal obligation for them to tell the truth in terms of how much they make. They might not be making a profit. I don't know anyone that has bought anything from facebook...plenty from amazon. Besides every few years the sites change..first collegeclub..then friendster...then myspace..then facebook and now linked in and disporia

Menya ,
what do you think ?

More people , please come forward and share your thoughts.

Maybe he/she already made their decision and are too busy trying to maintain the wrong one :)

Agreed, no private school for my kid. It's not a matter of money. It's that all the private school kids I knew growing up, didn't turn out well. I pin it on people spending a bunch of money on a school, who then think they are done with the job of seeing to their child's education. Pick a decent public school, and spend time yourself aside from school raising your kid. No school is a complete substitute for parental attention.

On a side note here's a few other things.

1) Private school teachers actually make less money than public school ones (at lest high school level). Unions are strong in teaching and it is much easier to organize in a public area than a private. Private schools can fail at a faster rate than public. Some states mandate that a school system must exist although that is dependent on enrollment. A cost benifit analysis determines the ratio's that must exist. Sometimes regionalization can be used in public schools to facilitate more spending to justify things. If one school has 100 students and another has 300...they combine at 400 and then the state might kick in money..

2) At least within public school there's no correlation that higher spending per pubil means higher graduation rates. The highest spender in mass is a city that pays $21,000 per student per year and yet the rate is only 77%..meanwhile there's others that don't even spend $8K and they are in the 90% and up rate.

Many teachers I know have a love/hate relationship with their union. They like the jobs but not the policies. I had a science professor in college that would love to teach more but they won't let him because he would have a monopoly over the whole subject. The budget doesn't exist for hiring more professors so they cancel classes. Other times I've heard of bright teachers reaching the kids and yet there's someone about to put in their 30th year without a care in the world because they have a pension coming to them soon.

Academica can have some real controversal topics. Just mensioning "tenure" to professors can open up cans of worms. Also there's the whole "teaching the test" idea.

The only recommendations I can give to higher ed would be the following:
1) don't be afraid of having summer classes. usually they are the same rate as the spring so this can hedge against inflation
2) a 529 plan might be a good idea as it can hedge against the raising of rates
3) online classes can be ok but don't expect them to be beyond 200 level
4) Shop around for books..heck get a ebook reader that way it's lighter - some states make it a law that institutions must release their ISBN's prior to a class. It might be a good idea to see what books were used for what ones because that can give a greater idea in terms of how the teacher teaches.
5) It's probably cheaper to commute then live in a dorm. Many schools restrict parking for those that live there since you might end up with public transport anyway
6) it can be worth it to go to a two year school first and then go to a four year. That way if someone leaves after two years they have a degree rather than credits.
7) time management - due to #5 I'd say this is important. If someone is around slackers they are more likely to..slack

francophile,

is it ISTP that you are talking about? I am looking at that for pre-school, would love to hear your feedback.

Still waiting for Menya......want to know what she thinks after reading all these stories.

Menya ??

As a non-US parent living in the Bay Area in a very similar situation, it is very nice of you Menya, to bring this up for discussion. Here is my 2 cents (apologies in advance for grammar mistakes):

1. Public school vs private school: First of all, when it is your child's future, financial motivations should always come secondary. What I mean is you shouldn't say "I will save X amount of money by not sending my kid to Y private school" as long as you have the financial ability.

Second, there is no absolute rule that a particular school will be better than the other for your child. It all depends on your child's character and capacity. If your child goes to school where he/she is not challenged at all, he/she will be bored and will loose interest. On the opposite, your child might struggle under a challenge too much for him/her.

I believe it is best for a child to have a well-balanced education (academically, socially, mentally). And that will be defined by the school environment (programs, facilities, etc), the competence of the teachers, the other students. (A big note on that: public schools are suffering from the state budget problems and it's getting worse.)

As for myself, I chose to send my daughter to a private school for a few years. This year she is going to a public school in a good district (Cupertino). I tried to choose a school where she would have to work a bit harder but not too much that she would also have fun. If your child spends more than a couple hours to do his/her homeworks every weekday, IMO that falls into the category of being "too much hard work". So far not so bad.

2. Buying vs renting: Again, there is no absolute rule that you should buy or rent, even in a time like this where the housing bubble is deflating(ed?).

I would recommend that you put off buying for a while (2 years maybe?) if there is a chance that you might move to change your child's school.

If you're certain that you'll stay put for at least 5 years (elementary school is 6 yrs already), and not move, then buying might be an option. At a time like this, 10 years is probably a better time period to stay put.

I believe that a house should not be viewed as a primary investment vehicle. A house is a primary need, a shelter at the first place. You shouldn't buy a house just because you want to make a profit so many years later when you sell it. However, the reality is that a lot of people do now and will do in the future. Due to this and some other factors, house prices in some of the nice school areas of the Bay Area probably will not decline too much, unless there is a shock of huge proportions that will alter the dynamics of this region (like an earthquake, be it financial or whatever).

It is ironic to see that the house prices being so out of whack was partly(or mostly) due to the government trying to making housing more affordable by making it easy to finance it.

So my advice to you, is to do a little bit of research, weigh the pluses and minuses of both public and private schools (don't count the money factor). Choose a school, rent a house closer to that school. See how it goes (for a couple years maybe?). By that time you'll know much better. If my prediction is correct, delaying a house purchase by about 2 years may also be a financially better decision.

I hope it makes sense. Good luck.

NejatK says

Public school vs private school: First of all, when it is your child’s future, financial motivations should always come secondary. What I mean is you shouldn’t say “I will save X amount of money by not sending my kid to Y private school” as long as you have the financial ability.

Unless you have unlimited resources, even from the (IMHO very questionable) position of maximizing your child's benefit regardless of your own sacrifice, one has to consider the cost of a private K-12 school vs. future college expenses vs. possibly helping your child to get started after college (such as downpayment on a house), etc. Making sure you would never have to ask your child for financial aid (even if you end up needing long-term nursing care and such) is a GREAT help to your child (guess how I know).

It is hard not to count the money factor. If I am funding $20K per year for 6 years and $35K for another 6 years, plus $45K for another 4 years, and then $80K for another 2 years, I will make damn sure my kid is heading towards WS raking in big bucks or else I would rather buy a house outright for him when he graduates from a UC, which already puts him way ahead of his peers.

Thanks everyone. It took me a while to read through all the comments.

Here are some facts:

1. My daughter is 2 so i have no way to yet evaluate her intellectual capabilities or preferences
2. I absolutely don't plan to let the schools do the work. I well realize that most of the success coems from home and plan to spend immense amount of time working with her in both academia as well as other, more fun things (travel, theatre, art...)
3. My husband and I both went through public schools (me: public, solid HS in Europe, Foothill coomunity college, SJSU for undergrad and MBA). Husband: Aragon HS in San MAteo county, SJSU undergrad. We have been working hard for the past 10 years and now in our early 30s each one makes about ~115K. We are both in marketing in rather large corporations.
4. Don't want to go a religious school route as we are atheists.
5. I'd like at least one more child in a year or two.

I don't want my kid to live in Cupertino and feel pressure of tiger mom syndrome. I was actually looking at Cambrian (95124) zip code or Almaden (95120).

My question came from the Cambrian being split into two zip codes (95118 where public schoold are not great) and 95124 (where schools are good - over 900 API).

I can buy a 4/2 house in 95118 for 570K. In 95124 the same style/size house is 770K.

Also, seems to me that tax interest deduction is a pretty good incentive to own given our income level (we just heard we need to pay extra 12K in taxes) :(

Menya,

stay away from Alamden then, it is quickly becoming another little Cupertino, 95120 is very popular among Chinese who cannot afford Cupertino. Cambrian seems like a better choice.

Menya says

Also, seems to me that tax interest deduction is a pretty good incentive to own given our income level (we just heard we need to pay extra 12K in taxes)

Ah, one more homeownership myth. Save on taxes.