Dont apologise for being Rich Matt, you worked hard for your money and you even quit university to take a risk, you dont owe any body an apology for sending your kids to private school, you earned the money legally and morally right to spend as you wish. ,
I don't think he even needs to justify why he sends his kids to private school, I mean, isn't it obvious? Just because he's advocating for a higher stander in public schools it doesn't mean his kids have to go to one. I would send my kids to private school regardless of how good the public schools were but still, public school children deserve a good standard.
+James Carlyle Enlighten us on the economics of education James. If I had to bet, I'd bet Damon knows more about it than you do, if for no other reason than that you've said multiple unsourced things in your last post and casually pass them on as facts.
***** There are many economists who don't agree, but names have no impression on me. Names can't be rebutted, and I'm not going to read boring books on the economics of education unless good points are made about the books by the person sourcing them. The fact of the matter is that there are benefits and detriments of unions and there is no definitive position. Wanting better schools while at the same time putting your kids in the best school you can isn't being hypocritical. Matt is actually obligated as a father to give his kids the best opportunity he can, which he believes he's doing by putting his kids in private school, while also vying for a better public system for his future grandkids. Matt's mother is a teacher as well, so discounting his knowledge and real life experience is a far more ignorant claim than the ignorance you think he represents.
***** We spend more on education, but how is it divvied out? We know that test scores award funding, and we also know that standardized tests are biased. Furthermore, we know that socioeconomic condition correlates to education levels, as do crime rates. Perhaps if we hadn't had a massive redistribution of wealth to the upper class 30 years ago we'd see less crime and more educated populations. When you know you can't get fired, you can use alternative teaching methods better suited to your particular class as well. It's not about job security. Teachers know full well going in that their hours and pay are going to be shit. That means that they have a passion for it, and job security probably was never a consideration. "Overhaul the system." That doesn't mean anything unless you say what to overhaul it to. It begins with overhauling the justice system and economic system in general so parents have more time to spend with their kids rather than work multiple jobs or serving prison sentences for stupid things, leaving their kids to bad influences and economic conditions. The education system itself is secondary to the main problems standing in the way of progress.
+Noggin Doin The point is no matter how much you spend on education, when you have a gigantic bureaucracy like the DoE, funds are never going to be allocated as efficiently as they would in a private, for profit institution because the survival of the DoE does not depend on student performance and is a de-facto monopoly. And knowing that you can't get fired produces horrible incentives for even the best meaning people. The only thing that forces a person to improve is the realization that his/her livelihood depends upon said improvement. I'd suggest overhauling the system by making it directly compete with private schools for taxpayer money, namely the voucher system.
D Kahn hello. since its unclear to you, let me help you. people send their child to private school because parents have greater control over what their child, eats, learns, the activities and where their money goes to do those things. if you had a brain you would know that parents who pay for private school, also pay taxes that pay for public. just because they have the ability to invest in their childs education doesnt make them unable to see the deficiency and want better in the public school system. the fact that you dont realize he said he would send his kids to public school, if they had a standard comparable means you dont care about facts, but your pre-conceived notions on the matter.
+John R I don't know if Matt's built schools, but he sure has done a lot of other humanitarian efforts. What have you done? Also, schools are very expensive. Not even Matt Damon can afford to build them on his own. His $65 million net worth is nothing compared to a $30 million high school.
***** You realize that net worth for wealthy people typically isn't very liquid right? He doesn't have $65 million in cash. Come on dude you should know this. And you want him to take a loan for his entire net worth to do something, or even half? How irresponsible do you think that is? Cuz that would be incredibly irresponsible. That's how wealthy people end up with nothing (happens all the time). The fact that you demand a celebrity donate at least half of their wealth (after taxes) for them not to be a hypocrite speaks volumes on your personal definition of "hypocrite." Damon travels the world over not just donating money but donating time and effort which is far more impressive. What do you do for the less well to do? I'm guessing jack shit. Which means the actual definition of "hypocrite" is probably better placed on yourself.
***** You get what you get when you call people you don't know phonies (with enthusiasm), especially guys like Damon who do a lot of great things and get bs comments like he's a phony for it. If he's pro-airbags for all cars, yet drives a car with airbags, I suppose you think he's a phony for that too? Because that's the equivalent argument to supporting public school development yet his children being in the currently superior private system. It's an irrational argument, or in other words, a phony argument. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
It costs him .0001% of his annual income...so for him probably not so much....I think what he's saying is that for the average person it is extremely expensive to send their kids to private schools but that the alternative is public schools which are shit...this rather contradicts his support for public school teachers being so great but again he's liberal so logic never gets in the way of something that receives applause
i think the better answer would be matt sends his kids to private school where it is normal for your parent to be very rich or famous. his kids would get different treatment in a public school because they would be the freaks that had the famous dad. at a private school where that is the norm, it would be less stressful because other kids are in teh same boat.
It's really simple. He sends his kids to private school because that's where they can get the best education he can afford. He's an activist for teacher's unions because that shouldn't be the case.
marlette782 Vouchers don't cover the cost of private schools they just work to supplement the costs for private schools. Inevitably there will be some percentage of people who couldn't afford private school but now can, but those people are not America's poor. The poor still can't afford private schools even with vouchers... Vouchers will just let the people who can afford private schools to not have to pay taxes for public schools so that the school that the poor kids go to will be even more poorly funded.
Scott Matthews Vouchers, charter schools are rather popular with the poor in Washington DC and New York City. I assume in the dispute between Governor Cuomo and the NYC mayor, you supported the mayor. I don't claim they solve everything, but they are a start. We need to encourage as much competition and freedom of choice as possible. There are many different ideas. Home schooling is another one. Democrats also talk a great deal about bullying. You are not going to stop bullies until you punish the public schools for neglecting the subject. The best way to do that is by hitting them in the wallet. That is where school choice comes in
went to a private school. they were very focused on us becoming a lawyer, doctor, etc. little to no support in us going into the arts and if we wanted to go into the trades, it was only if we went as an engineer. my brother and i wanted to do automotive and got zero support from our school. he dropped out and went to public for votech and i stuck with the private school. we eventually dropped out of college later on and some of the heads of our private school said it was inevitable for us. he now runs a concrete company under the owner in florida and im now a Project manager and CAWI for a 3rd party construction site inspection company. we went back and visited recently and the old art teacher and science teacher were the only two that seemed unsurprised at our success. private schools are for the most part safer, but they dont always have the whats best for the kids in mind. most i feel only look out for their reputation.
true but higher educaton is always better then trade jobs, im saying this as a journeyman electrician. For the life of me i cant understand why anyone would want to do trades.
@alexsalazar5161 that's fair and it's definitely easier on the body [for the most part]. I have my regrets of not finishing uni, but I worked on both sides of the fence, and I prefer being in the field vs. in an office all day. But also also, that's just my experience. Yeah I would rather be racing motorcycles or be paid to travel the world but also I'm now a steel inspector and it affords me to at least buy my toys and travel so it works out. Though I also know not everyone is that lucky. Again this is just my personal experience.
I went to a great public school with very high standards and even enforced a minimum GPA of a 2.5 to even stay in the school. one of the issues is, we do need more funding to enhance better education. starting with esthetics: schools that are clean and not run down. then better school supplies, books, equipment, things that will aid in helping students learn. another are more experienced teachers with extensive backgrounds in the subject that they are teaching. those that do not just follow the standard curriculum. another is to increase the intensity of the education curriculum. we seem to cater to making school fun and convenient for children vs actually enforcing them to either meet the high standards or do not attend school at all. in other countries, schools run from 7am til about 4pm and their lesson plan is rigorous and long where scores are not based on a curve. these are things that can greatly improve our education.
I say go ahead and keep public schools but instead of providing them never-ending funding, give the parents vouchers and let the parents decide which schools to put their kids in and limit them only to availability and students qualifying for that particular school. Then schools will flourish or die depending on how good they are at attracting students. You'd have schools emerge that specialize in special needs kids, schools that specialize in average kids and schools that specialize in geniuses. You'd even have boys only and girls only. You'd have a large variety to pick from suited for all types of children and a classroom environment designed especially for them.
Yah but that's separating people based on the same criteria... the thing is, the point of everyone being different in our own ways is that everyone complements each other and that's all the more reason we need to work together to make the world better instead of destroying it and all within. So instead of separating based on gender, academic abilities, and so on, schools need to go back to teaching skills and knowledge relevant for life, such as cooking, cleaning, bills and taxes, gardening, sewing/mending, building, nature and space and such, and so on.
@@Cassxowary What about those of use who already learned relevant life skills from these wonderful teachers called parents? I was bored out of my mind in so called "life skills" classes that were required when I was in school. And do you not realize what a contradiction you're stating. You're talking about making the world a better place. Okay, fair enough. But what about technology? What about science?
Depends on the public schools. The ones near me are fantastic. The teachers are top notch and care about their students. I'm sure it's different in a poorer community but I don't think it's fair to put down all public schools.
The private school he chose to send his kids to, in lieu of the public schools he applauds out of the other side of his mouth, is the closest thing he could find to the public schools he himself attended? That's interesting. I myself, also a product of public schools and now a public school teacher, have never witnessed a public school comprised solely of children of the ultra-rich, who never had to mingle with unwashed masses. My schools never had security, and except for a parent picking us up for a doctor's appointment here or there, we rode public school buses instead of being privately chauffeured in black SUVs.
I think the reason why he supports this issue is that his mom was a public teacher at the school system he was going when he was growing up. He probably comparing what it was then to what it is now
Abolish state controlled schools private schools would not be so expensive if all of the parents sent their kids to a private school higher consumer driving prices down.
+FrecklyCash5959 IT's over supply that drives down prices not an increase in demand. The only way the price of education would fall is if you suddenly had a massive explosion in the number of private schools
Ed Harding We don't live in the 19th century the internet exists where you can have all of the information at your finger tips. Education in the statist society is just a regulation, a piece of paper that says you qualify for a particular job.
Educating children up to the age of 16 is vital not only for the development of that child as one able to work, persist, and create, but also for social equality and integration. Children develop habits when they are young. Giving all children and equal education, allows them to develop the skills required to be employable. So surely having a good state education system, funded by taxes, gives for a better society. You improve a populations work ethic.
I can't see charters as a step in the wrong direction. Many public schools are not adequate, and are located in districts where parents are not financially empowered to do anything about it. What's sad is that there are some seriously talented kids whose potential is being washed down the drain, completely ignored by people who are overwhelmed in a under performing, ill equipped system. If you're just going to throw money at the problem, the single greatest use of money would be to raise teacher salaries(which are unfortunate) and establish a vetting system to justify higher salaries. There is not currently much incentive to become a teacher, especially at intercity public schools, where there are limited career upgrade paths and low salaries. Germany and Japan both keep tabs on higher and lower performing students. Entrance exams in Japan for both high school and university sort students according to ability. As for Germany, only kids set on university complete 18 years of ED. You are only required to complete 16 years and then can move on to a trade school which wastes less of everyone's time. I could see a refocusing of graduation standards, to permit lower performing students to pursue career options outside of school as well as community college courses, as a step forward. Most high schools operate a duality of quality education classes and reduced rigor lower performing classes. The "regular" classes often fail to train students for the rest of life. Schools just dogmatically push through core curriculum requirements that trade a focus on meaningful progress for a box of check lists. Would we rather that students are able receive the instruction given or merely receive exposure to curriculum? Regular class students usually have shown limited progress in school which is then matched with reduced standards, so many can graduate. This just results in complacency being installed in students. If my computer begins to malfunction, it shows that deeper problems are afoot and I need to diagnose those problems. Without diagnosing the source of a student's comprehension difficulties its hard to address shortcomings and require improvement. Instead a push through the curriculum is preferred. Meaningful progress is itself a standard, requiring a demonstration of comprehension, and a standard that should be instituted not sidelined. Whether we can diagnose students difficulties, a student should be able to come to an understanding of their abilities and inabilities and pursue a course action that helps them instead of being chained to a superficial path of progress. If they are immediatedly going to be released into the work world, that needs to be considered. In consideration of this, students should be able to pursue courses that suit their strengths earlier on. I think my local community college already has a mini high school running. Schools need to be structurally changed as well. Why we give kids 2 months off in the middle of the year to forget all they learned, just shows how out of touch the system is with learning patterns of a human being. Choosing to learn Calculus over a summer semester was one of the smartest moves I made, simply because the PreCal was fresh on my mind, and I found I retained more of what I learned in that month-and-a-half for my end of semester test. I found those who advised against it to be off base. Cal 2 is another story (simply too much to remember in a short space) The status quo should not be considered a solution. (ongoing revision of post)
Rock on public schools! and public school teachers. Anyone can teach Mr. Damon's kid (two story house, white picket fence, 2.5 kids, and a dog named Spot.). Public school allows all people from k-12 to interact with all people for this brief time in their life. Then they move on. Keep making great movies. You are an ass kicking actor.
People in the comments are not understanding that the quality of public schools ranges hugely across the country. As someone who has attended public school all my life with the exception of two years in which I went to a private Christian school, I can confidently say that the public schools in my area exceed the quality of the private schools. I live in northern Virginia in the suburbs of D.C., and all the counties around me (Fairfax [in which I live], Loudon) have top-notch public school systems. I'm even lucky enough to live within range of what Business Insider is calling "the #1 smartest public high school": Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, and was admitted this year. However, I have cousins in Georgia, and their situation is very different. Their public school system is poor, so the private schools far exceed the public schools. In that case, it makes more sense to send one's children to private schools. Matt Damon isn't necessarily being hypocritical.
I think people accuse him of being hypocritical because he is opposed to school choice. A lot of people think that families should be able to send their kids to whatever school they want, regardless of zoning. The state could attach the money to kids, and schools would only get the funding if the student enrolled. Parents and families would vote with their feet, the good schools would survive, the bad schools would go out of business. Damon has sided with the teacher's unions, which have vehemently opposed any choice. They need to protect the pay packages and benefits of their members. If bad schools closed, a lot of bad teachers would lose their jobs. While that sounds good to most people, the unions are terrified. All those bad teachers are dues paying members. I'm sure Damon thinks his views are in the interest of kids, but I don't think telling people where they have to send their kids to school, regardless of how bad the school is, is appropriate, and it is a little hypocritical for him to talk about his education choices with his children, while arguing against that same choice being offered to regular families.
I'm all for whatever system of school guarantees better results...I really dislike public schools. I'm more of a charter school supporter but I see the benefits of private school for those who might be in Matt's position or for people who really want a special academic experience for their kids. I will say that I have seen some private schools do worse than public schools in terms of standardized test. I feel like there is pressure for some private schools to skimp things to keep up appearances and show parents what they want to see as opposed to have the kid show. Having said that, anything is better than public school period even K-12 online or home school.
private schools are better because there are less bullies in there but the teachers are very demanding sometimes the problem is that there must be no violence in public schools more safety to the students and if that happens there will be peace.Darth Sidious
@@michaelblasius7705Damn right !!! Two things matter in how a child develops the quality of the parents and the quality of the school I mean those two matter more than anything else.Genetics are of course important but you cannot blame a person for its genes
When did an actor become someone to interview about schools. He is an actor not an educator. Just like Marlon Brando said, course matty boy is no Brando.
It's worse than that. He's a complete hypocrite - where his money brings choice for his own children while he promotes an anti-school-choice agenda for others.
U.S Public system is messed up 👎 Why having 3months of summer break ???? Each class finish the kids should have 15min break even a teacher . Not 15min lunch X , 1hrs of lunch time . If they don’t have stupid 3month of break They can have 15min break in each class and 1hr lunch + let the kids play out side No more sitting down on the chairs Let them Learn social experience at school It should be only 1months of summer break They even have very long winter break And spring break .. and other so many holidays.. American education system is so messed up 👎
U.S Public system is messed up 👎 Why having 3months of summer break ???? Each class finish the kids should have 15min break even a teacher . Not 15min lunch X , 1hrs of lunch time . If they don’t have stupid 3month of break They can have 15min break in each class and 1hr lunch + let energy out play out side It should be only 1months of summer break They even have very long winter break And spring break .. and other so many holidays.. American education system is so messed up 👎
The U.S. has nearly tripled the amount spent per government school pupil in inflation‐adjusted dollars in the last 40 years while test scores have remained flat and internationally unimpressive. A recurrent problem reported by the students, especially by the public undergraduate, is the disconnect between what is taught and the practical reality of the job market. • NOTE: The most famous, very top undergraduate programs are indeed private. For example: the entire Ivy League (which includes Harvard, Yale, Princeton), MIT, CalTech, Stanford. Of the public schools, only Berkeley regularly appears in the top 10. Public undergraduates consider many professors lazy, self-centred, and selfish as they are very rarely fired. You pay for your children to be educated so why should you be paying for teachers time to research? For Profit Private Uni`s must perform or go broke which is just as it should be. You measure results by the overall profitability of a private uni`. Also, because public uni`s are infested with communists/socialists the brainwashing is atrocious. Everything you despise will be shoved down their otherwise innocent throats as gospel truth.
A measure of how successful private vs. public education is is the success rate of the graduates. Top five schools that produced the most Nobel Prize laureates were all public schools: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_laureates_by_secondary_school_affiliation
r u fuckin' high? Looking at the link you posted regarding the top 5 schools that produced the most Nobel laureates, 4 of them have extremely rigorous merit requirements and only accept a tiny fraction of the kids who apply. Of the 4, two are highly prestigious private schools and 2 are specialized public schools.
Have you seen or been in a public school lately? Subject to whatever whim that comes down the pike, and the low-rent type of parents who send their thuggish kids there because school is mandatory. I wouldn't send my kids to a public school ever if I had the option of a private school available to me. I don't blame any parent for keeping his kids out of public school.
He doesnt wanna say it...... public schools do not and will not get u a good life compared to private. There shouldn't be separate schools for rich and poor, you kno what happens when poor and rich kids go to school together?????when the rich grow up there less inclined to screw over poor people, but ya kno great system keep us separated, just as long people know there place in life
"I wish I didn't have to" You didn't have to. "It's expensive" Said the multi millionaire. Just admit it. Private schools are usually better. They are expensive, but if public schools were privatized, taxes could be reduced and people could afford the private schools.
I hold Matt Damon in high esteem. I agree with him on most things, as I seem to here. The problem is the quality of the public schools. That is the reason matt sends his kids private schools. although from my perspective the problem with most schooling is that it isn't about how to think, but about what to believe. I agree with Chomsky, zinn and others that much of what is taught is simply propaganda - especially with american history. If I have kids, they will be homeschooled, and learn to think for themselves. with this new thing called the internet I will invent a new type of school.
i'm a public school teacher and admit the quality sucks, because it's too focused on testing. We don't even teach history in grade 5. Kids don't truly learn science until grade 5 either, leaving teachers to teach 4 years worth of material in time for(you guessed it), another test.
Private schools and school choice breeds competition which gives a better product to the people. Matt Damon is an elitist hypocrite. “Do as I say, not as I do”.
The poor Bush family kids went to a private school. Good for them. If people had a choice about using the DMV nobody would go their either (and for the same reason). People should have a choice about where they send their kids to school - and if they did, the Damon family kids too could go to a school of their choice for a lot less money.
The system in place is perfect for Matt Damon. With his money, he can send his kids to private schools, where they will have a leg up on the poor kids who have to suffer through the substandard public schools. If there was an option for poor kids to go to private schools, they might brush against his own precious children.
@Hai Hai Certainly public school teachers can afford it. About 1 in 5 of them send their own children to public schools, even as their union fights school choice with everything they have. www.redefinedonline.org/2014/08/survey-1-in-5-school-teachers-send-kids-to-private-schools/
closed them all down and replace with virtual classes (k-doctorates) for free online taught by the leaders of the industry, it is the best and inevitable way. It is obvious to me business classes should be taught by billionaires and science classes should be taught by Nobel price winners, not by the people that couldn't cut it in the real world. If you consolidate and virtualize it will be super cheap and you could still get the best teachers in the world teach, probably for free, but even if they charge a million dollars it would still be cheaper, it is 2016 get with the times....it is sad that forward progress is not being made and people still need to talk about the primitive building people go to in order to get information.....there is this thing called the internet, eventually accredited classes will be online if they don't do it I say screw them and make a new accreditation consortium.
Americans are seeing the tip of the iceberg now. Online education can be crowdfunded by the best of the best----look at Khan Academy, TED ED, etc. It's transparent, universal, etc.
@@JK-gu3tl well this message was from 2016 same comment could have probably have been made 1995....i am glad we are catching up but really it should be government sponsored and free by now cost per student would maybe like 100 bucks if done right. Even if you did want midterms and finals to be in person you can leverage highshools after hours for testing.
@Hai Hai If you do one thing - push an agenda that traps kids in poor public schools - while doing another - a wealthy guy with choices sending his own children to high-performing private schools - you're a hypocrite. If educational choice is good for him, why is it not good for the poor? Choice drives competition and competition drives performance. School aid should be completely portable and go with the student to the school that his or her parent chooses for him or her to attend. Failing schools would close, performing schools would prosper.
Public schools spend more per student than charters and he wants to throw even MORE money at it? Smh... We should only keep public high schools for the sports, but everything before that should be privatized and open to competition.
