This article examines the debate between equity theorists (Adam Swift and Harry Brighouse) and adequacy theorists (Elizabeth Anderson and Debra Satz) over elite private schooling and productivity. It challenges the view, presupposed but never defended by adequacy theorists, that private schools can be justified on social productivity grounds, that is, on account of their ability to increase social wealth and thus benefit the least well-off. The article also argues against what it calls the sufficientarian productivity advantage. Contrary to what adequacy theorists claim, the equity approach does not neglect productivity considerations and, conversely, the adequacy approach exaggerates the extent to which it successfully accommodates the interest in productivity within its account of educational justice.