–Update in 2020: Q: What does a school district mean to me?
A: It means level of drug prevalence.
A: It means motivation level among fellow students.
A: I don’t care that much about benchmark score

SG average school is possible a 7/10 (possibly 10) school district in terms of benchmark and discipline. Similarly, California schools often has higher academic standard than NJ school districts.

Why do I spend so much on U.S. top school districts (housing, private schools etc) when Singapore is cheaper and better?

---

Buyers bid up home valuations. According to my friend  Paul Meduna, when buyers pay the pTax (or rent) in such a school district, they are paying to be entitled to the local high school.

They put a high value on the SD not only because they put that value on the local high school. I guess their kids may not enroll in that high school (but Paul disagrees). Even if they do, that school may not be suitable for them (too competitive?)

For me, the high school is not the most important thing I pay for. In addition to the high school, buyers put a value on

• conducive learning environment, 校风, motivation level in the schools, …
• teacher/student ratio and equipment, but the top school districts may not be better.
• academic competition — a double-edged sword
• serious fellow parents. I was told that many Black, Hispanic and other White parents don’t emphasize benchmark performance.
• clean street
• ECA
• asset appreciation
• much bigger home size (but also higher tax and maintenance costs)
• privacy — far from city, trains or neighbors

Conventional wisdom equates top school district rating to superior learning environment.

It’s difficult but conceptually, I want to separate the academic benchmark element from the conducive environment, because these are two separate benefits you pay for.

Most of the costs we pay for top school districts are perceived as a price to pay for benchmark performance.  Common parent psychology.

To put it more bluntly, what if the pTax + home price premium (+ longer commute) only “buy” a modern, well-equipped (like in movies) conducive learning environment with many special programs [1], but without the superior academic performance? It could happen if the students don’t put in more effort than students in other schools. I doubt any parents would accept the deal.

More funding doesn’t automatically improve academic performance. At high school level, student’s effort is the #1 factor, followed by 2) abilities 3) parents + teachers.

Schools are rated by benchmark tests, but test score is not always correlated with funding — some very poor schools in China produce better exam takers than the affluent schools. Therefore, you are really paying for an environment and system geared towards test scores.

[1] those ECA programs, even the academic ones, may not directly help the benchmark tests.

For me, I want to pay for a conducive environment, not benchmark performance. An above average school might provide that, at a huge saving.