George W. Bush went to one. So did his father. And so did John F. Kennedy, Al Gore, and John McCain. And, of course, this is just a handful of our nation's political leaders, past and present, who've attended high school away from home. There are many more than this.

When you consider the fact that only about 38,000 kids attend boarding schools, but 15 million attend regular public high schools, it's hard not to argue that the boarding school graduates are getting more than their share of the power pie.

Did boarding school make the difference? And if you aren't going to one, are you getting an inferior education?

According to the Association of Boarding Schools, here are some things to think about:

• Students at boarding schools find the work to be more challenging: 91 percent of boarding school students think school is hard--compared to 70 percent of students at private day schools, and only 50 percent of students at public school.
• More boarding school students feel ready for college: 87 percent say they're "very well prepared academically" at boarding schools, compared to 71 percent of private day-schoolers and 39 percent of public schoolers.
• More boarding school graduates earn advanced degrees: Half go on to do this, compared to 36 percent of private day-schoolers and 21 percent of public schoolers.

Of these three bullet points, the first is the one most worth paying attention to, because if that one is a given, a hunger for more education will tend to follow.

Think about it: Only half the students who go to public school find it challenging. If you look at it another way, half the students at public schools--and probably the brightest ones there--are finding it to be a waste of their time. After all, what is the point of doing work that doesn't challenge you? It just fills the day without generating meaningful rewards.

Somehow, boarding school is doing this better, on average, than other schools. There are many possible reasons why:

• Kids spend all day and night there, sometimes even attending classes on Saturday.
• Students come from all around the United States, and even from other countries, resulting in a more diverse and challenging mix of ideas.
• Boarding schools can be selective about who they take, so they can cherry-pick the smartest and most ambitious.
• Class sizes are smaller--11 is the median, according to the National Association of Independent Schools--and schools can give kids academic offerings tailored to their interests. Schools are smaller, as well, with an average enrollment of 272.

On the first three points, public schools can't really compete. Parents, of course, can help create a home environment as academically charged as a boarding school. And they can go out of their way to expose their kids to viewpoints from around the world.

But the last one--smaller schools, with small class size--is a wide-open option, provided society is willing to foot the bill.

The benefit of this is that students' interests and needs are better known in smaller schools, and they can be pushed to achieve more--so their time and mind power won't be wasted.

This is something that private day schools do well; I teach at one and know each of my students and their interests well, and in turn, they know I expect them to do a lot. Which they do. Students of mine have published in the New York Times, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the Christian Science Monitor, and on MSN Entertainment and Encarta.

Small class sizes, high expectations, and personalized attention aren't things that only help kids whose parents can afford the tuitions at boarding schools
(which cost more than $40,000 a year) or private day schools (upwards of $20,000 a year).

As part of an effort to remake the nation's public high schools, the Gates Foundation has tracked the difference that can be made with more rigorous, relevant, and relationship-rich high school environments.

In a speech given in early 2005, Bill Gates referred to the Met School in Providence, Rhode Island, where more than 50 percent of the students come from homes poor enough to qualify them for free lunch. More than 60 percent are students of color and almost 40 percent speak English as a second language at home.

What's more, instead of selecting the best and brightest of those students, the Met enrolls only those kids who are either dropouts or at risk of quitting school. But fewer kids drop out of this 336-person school and more go on to higher education than at any other school in the state.

So maybe the question shouldn't be whether boarding schools are better. This, after all, tends just to remind us that kids born with great advantages tend to keep them. Rather, we should ask, what can we do to make all high schools that good?

And it's worth asking, because the high schools today aren't nearly good enough. Even though our fourth-graders are among the best at math and science in the world, by the time those same kids are 12th-graders, they rank near the bottom.

In an increasingly global economy, we won't be able to keep up with innovation and new technology if our students aren't well educated.

The cost of doing this, of course, will be high. In the United States, we spend about $7,500 per year, per child on public school education. That's not chump change (and the United States, compared to other countries, often spends more on schooling as a percentage of our gross domestic product). But it's a far cry from the $40,000 boarding school bill, or the $20,000 tuition at a private day school. And many cry that we can't afford to spend more.

But we somehow manage to find, say, $17,500 a year to house prisoners. This is what it costs in Florida, for example. Other states might even spend more. And of course, this doesn't include the cost of prosecution, defense, and damage done by the crime that led to the jail sentence.

Wouldn't that money be better spent on education? How many fewer kids would slip into a life of crime if they had teachers who had the time to care? Or if someone expected them to do well, and provided appropriate, motivating opportunities?

What's more, losing our competitive advantage in science and technology to countries such as Singapore, China, and Japan will undoubtedly cost far more than creating schools where our kids will succeed. It's already happening. Our test scores are consistently below those countries' scores. And at the high school level, only Canada has a worse student-teacher ratio than the United States when compared with other nations we compete with.

But with some good leadership, perhaps, we can rebound. Imagine if all those boarding school politicians decided that all kids deserved the opportunities they themselves received. Then maybe American leadership would have a shot at continuing through the 21st century.