Writing Circle #3

We spent the majority of our writing circle, on Thursday July 5th & on Tuesday July 9th, talking about our project ideas.  While Darcy and Jim are focused upon the differents between public and private education, they are doing so from different directions --- and with very different hypothesis' going into the project.

I bring up their work because it seems to cause the most conversation, and it has left me with progress on my opinion regarding these schools.  I recently told Jim that I believed he, getting a private education from St. Ignatius, received a 'better' education than I, at the public high school in Mayfield.

That stance was after a great deal of thought, and is based upon a few thoughts: (1) At a good private school, such as St. Ignatius, the education is college oriented. With courses offered such as Latin, Anatomy, etc. --- replacing home economics, wood shop, etc. ---- his education would make him more desirable, and further, better equipped for a rigorous college environment. (2) Although the 'top' of the class may be offered the same opportunities --- such as college choice --- the least achieving in each class show a great disparity.  While the least achieving may be lucky to graduate high school, the bottom of a class at St. Ignatius will still, surely, be expected to enter college.

I speak in generalities, for the sake of brevity, and I only mention these opinions to paint a picture of my position --- rather than to defend it. Because I am honestly still unsure of the answer.  

Jim brought up that the education at each school was simply 'different' --- not 'better or worse,' as I described it.  I think there is common ground to be had here.  For example, if a student had no interest in going to college, and instead wanted to become an auto mechanic, wouldn't he be better suited not to take Latin, and instead take, and enjoy, auto-mechanics? I think those at Surrey Hill would agree that that student shouldn't be forced to take Latin. 

And my last qualification comes here: it is not the basis of each class, the option of each class, or the choosing of each class which makes either inherently better.  It is that we are placed in each school, offering different classes, based upon the our economic and social distinctions.  Further, we rank how valuable or how much 'better' each choice is.  It doesn't help, and it doesn't make things better.  THIS we need to fix. and we cannot hide behind the ideal of 'class mobility,' because it is just that, an American ideal --- not a reality.