Well, one could say a church is a church is a church, but those who have experienced wildly varying congregations and denominations know that's not true.        

   At basic expectations, an American school is expected to engage the core subjects and a few common electives, and if that is all that is engaged, the past seventy years' experience supplies a pretty decent estimate of what to expect in the resulting education and training.
   But what if learning is engaged in a different way, with a deeper examination of subjects, a different, more holistic orientation of subjects, and the inclusion of some forgotten subjects which successfully fortified American founders and statesmen?
  A partial list of LPA's classical Christian curriculum distinctives is placed below for consideration.

 It's a legitimate question, but first the term "OK" must be defined. OK by which standard? Here are some standards often offered.

I have a really good job.
Is this the standard for an excellent education?
Question: would a deeper education be more or less valuable to one's career and appreciation of the surrounding world?

I got a pretty high score on the SAT.
Is this the standard for an excellent education?
Question: Since the SAT and its peers control the content to be tested, what do standardized tests not assess? Since schools, driven to have students perform well on such tests, certainly then teach (directly) to them, what is not being taught. What difference would the "missing" content potentially have upon someone's education -- and appreciation and opportunities?

I have a master's degree (or Ph.D.)
This worthy accomplishment speaks to both intelligence and diligence.
Question: Similar to those above, wouldn't that higher degree be even more meaningful and useful with a more thorough classical Christian foundation underneath it?